Another issue has been added to the long list of things that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) cannot agree on -- whether to pick up their referendum ballots.
On Tuesday, PFP Chairman James Soong (
No law will be broken if a person does not vote in the referendum, but it is a civic duty and a precious opportunity to ensure that the people's voice can be heard.
Politicians and government officials who oppose this, such as Soong and PFP lawmakers who plan to ape their leader, set very bad examples for a young democracy.
As for Lien, Ma and other KMT members who are playing hard-to-get on the issue, well, they are just laughable. But this is no joke. It should be a matter of pride and joy for every citizen that this country is about to reach a democratic milestone with the holding of this referendum. Not only are Lien and Ma in fact indefensibly opposed to the referendum, they dare not admit to this for fear of incurring public scorn.
It is hard to respect people who can be so evasive, so cowardly -- yet this is merely another example of the KMT's dispiriting ambiguity on critical matters of principle, another example of which was its refusal to participate in referendum debates with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
The KMT apparently feels it has much to resent over this referendum, and some members, particularly Ma, have not been shy in courting the media in the past, so why not use the debates to explain their reasons for opposing it? At least they would earn some respect that way.
Instead, pro-blue-camp talk-show hosts, such as Li Ao (
Ma tried to explain that the KMT's refusal to take part in the debates was not an attack on referendums per se, just the March 20 referendum.
But that still does not explain why the KMT is unwilling to join the debates. Jaw, for his part, is also opposed to the upcoming referendum, but he's almost salivating at the prospect of taking on the DPP.
The fundamental reason for the KMT equivocating on the referendum appears to be concern about being labeled "anti-democratic" and "anti-referendum." This wishy-washy, ambiguous behavior is nothing new. In fact, the pan-blue camp has behaved this way with respect to other major policy issues, especially sovereignty -- witness Lien's opening statement in last Saturday's debate proposing to put sovereignty issues aside.
In the end, however, there is only one question that matters: Can Lien Chan be entrusted with the future of a country whose very democratic processes he detests?
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations