In recent statements, President Chen Shui-bian (
After his election in 2000, the situation was tense: not only did China threaten to attack Taiwan, but the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) faithful in the military and security agencies didn't appreciate the election of the pro-independence Chen.
Chen and his advisers thought it prudent to try to smooth matters over by making a statement saying, "As long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan, I promise that during my term I will not declare independence, will not change the name of the country, will not push for the incorporation of a special state-to-state model of cross-strait relations in the Constitution and will not push for a referendum on the independence-unification issue that will change the status quo. Nor will there be any question of abolishing the National Unification Guidelines or the National Unification Council."
It does not need to be emphasized that the qualifier "as long as the Chinese communist regime does not intend to use force against Taiwan" was all-important.
However, Chen was lectured time and again by arrogant and defeated KMT politicians and back-seat driving US think-tank figures alike that he should stick to the "five noes" no matter what China did.
After three years of continuing military threats and a more than doubling of the number of missiles aimed at Taiwan, Chen has now come to the conclusion that the "five noes" have reached the end of their useful life. That is to be applauded.
The fact is that the "five noes" were never popular among his core followers.
They saw the "five noes" as unnecessary roadblocks on the road to full democracy in Taiwan and full acceptance of the nation in the international community.
With the presidential election coming up, Chen is emphasizing the right of the people to hold a referendum and implying that the "five noes" might be about to meet their demise.
He is achieving two purposes: he is rallying his supporters and at the same time making it clear to the world community that China is the real threat to stability and peace across the Taiwan Strait.
There are some in the US administration, and in think tanks and the international media, who perceive Chen to be unnecessarily provocative.
These people should look twice: China is continuing to threaten Taiwan, preventing its international relations from blossoming, and building up an awesome arsenal of missiles aimed at the nation. During the past three years, Chen has bent over backwards to be conciliatory and has held out one olive branch after another only to be rebuffed by China time and again.
It is thus time for Taiwan and the international community to move towards a "three yeses" policy:
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to determine their own future, free of interference from China;
Yes to Taiwan's right to be a full, equal member of the international community, including the UN; and
Yes to the right of Taiwanese people to choose a name, flag, and anthem which really represent Taiwan.
Instead of kowtowing to Beijing, the US should have an evenhanded policy which upholds the basic principles of democracy and human rights.
It is indeed time for clarity instead of ambiguity.
But the remarks of US President George W. Bush on the occasion of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (
There is still time: Bush and his administration should make it crystal clear to Beijing that they must back off, dismantle the missiles aimed at Taiwan, and, if it truly believes in peaceful resolution, enter into talks with the democratically-elected government of Taiwan.
The US and other nations would also do well to rethink their policy towards Taiwan: it is not the same country as it was 30 or 40 years ago, when the present "one China" concept came into existence.
At that time, there was a repressive KMT regime, which had lost the Chinese Civil War and imposed itself on a defenseless Taiwanese population. The KMT's decades-long insistence on being the legitimate government of China was as laughable as it was outdated, but it dragged the Taiwanese people unwillingly into the unfinished business of the Chinese Civil War.
The Taiwanese had no part in that Civil War, but their future is still being held hostage to it.
It is time for the international community to break out of the chains that it has imposed on itself and accept Taiwan and its people as full-fledged members of the international family of nations.
Gerrit van der Wees is the editor of Taiwan Communique.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US