The Year of the Fire Dog has kicked off on a positive note for Taiwan, thanks to the boldness and vision of President Chen Shui-bian. As a neutral observer of cross-straits relations, I agree with Chen that the timing is now appropriate to consider abolishing the National Unification Council and unification guidelines.
Why should a council exist when it serves no purpose, both in the current climate and in the foreseeable future? Ask any neutral observer of cross-straits relations and the answer is likely to be that Taiwan and the People's Republic of China (PRC) are two independent and sovereign countries.
Regardless of how deep the PRC's desire to seek reunification with Taiwan is, two facts are undeniable. Firstly, Taiwan (or as some would still term it, the Republic of China) has been governed separately from the PRC for the past 57 years.
Secondly, the issue of reunification has to be approached based on a principle of two equal entities (and not on a superior-subordinate mentality) and, ultimately, decided upon by the 23 million Taiwanese, and not by the one-sided aspirations of the Chinese government or the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
I have always taken the view that KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Thus, I was disappointed to note his comments which suggested that Chen's credibility would be questioned if he decides to scrap the council and guidelines, just because he had promised before his election and re-election that he would not abolish them.
Both the KMT (who apparently seeks to politicize an honest statement by Chen) and the US government should note that in reality, Chen's promises were based on the condition that the PRC does not pose any threat to Taiwan. I believe that even Ma and the KMT would be forced to admit that China has been threatening Taiwan (both verbally and through the build-up of missiles aimed at the island) over the past six years.
Allow me to illustrate the situation further with an analogy. A couple gets married and takes their wedding vows, promising to take care of each other forever. Some time later, they realize that circumstances have changed and a divorce is in the interests of both parties. Do we then say that the promises and vows made earlier have affected the credibility of the couple? The wedding vows, like Chen's promises, were made upon certain conditions.
While it has been reported that some Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators were not happy with Chen's announcement, it was heartening to note that several DPP heavyweights such as Vice President Annette Lu (
In my humble opinion, Taiwan is blessed and fortunate to have had Chen as its president over the past six years. He has shown himself to be a man with firm beliefs and when faced with threats and pressure, he has not compromised on his vision of making Taiwan a dignified, sovereign nation.
When he steps down from the presidency in May 2008, I am worried about the future of Taiwan.
Chen's successor as the next president (regardless of his political affiliation) should work for the interest of the 23 million citizens, and not succumb to the whims and fancies of tyrants, or international pressure.
Yet again, the destiny of the country's future lies in the hands of its 16 million or so voters. The vote should be for the man who can safeguard the nation's sovereign identity, and not merely for the more charismatic candidate.
Jason Lee Boon Hong
Singapore
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.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past