In his Lunar New Year's address, President Chen Shui-bian (
However, some US officials do not back Chen's suggestions and have even poured cold water on them. Most Taiwanese are disappointed and frustrated with the US reaction and are now questioning why the US is so willing to please Beijing at the expense of its own founding spirit and democratic principles.
Following Chen's Lunar New Year's speech, some US officials sought to collude with the nation's pro-China media outlets and exaggerate the consequences of Chen's remarks, insinuating that US President George W. Bush was disgruntled with the contents of Chen's address. In addition, they implied that if Chen refuses to reiterate the the pledges from his 2000 and 2004 inaugural addresses, then Bush will openly reprimand Chen when he next meets Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Although we should not fear China-leaning US officials and their prejudices against Taiwan, it is worrying that the US government's unfair criticism of Chen's New Year address is a blatant violation of democratic principles. When commenting on the address, the US State Department reiterated that the US' Taiwan policy adheres to the "one China" principle and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), and abides by the three US-China Communiques. The TRA is the only one of these that is concerned with ensuring Taiwan's security and interests. The others -- the "one China" policy and the three communiques -- take care of China's immediate interests. In other words, there is a serious imbalance between US-Taiwan relations and US-China relations. It is most regrettable, in the light of this imbalance, that deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli could misconstrue Chen's desire to enter the UN under the name Taiwan as a unilateral change to the status quo. This unquestionably denies Taiwan its sovereignty, effectively shuts Taiwan out of the international community and leaves us in a political no man's land.
Sean McCormack, spokesman for the US State Department, has said that the US supports dialogue between China and Taiwan to allow the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve the issue. This is simply ridiculous. Taiwan is an independent country, completely separate from China: Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China and the two are completely different. How can one ask the people of Taiwan to negotiate with the people of China and reach a mutually acceptable solution?
The practical realities of the situation are that Taiwan has a population of 23 million to China's 1.3 billion. Surely asking these two sides to enter into negotiations is the same as asking the people of Taiwan to capitulate. What would have happened if the international community had insisted the US negotiate for a mutually acceptable solution with the people of Britain to bring an end to their war of independence? If that had happened, would the US be an independent country today?
As Chen said in Tainan several days ago, Taiwan's sovereignty belongs to the 23 million people of Taiwan, and is not to be shared with the 1.3 billion people in China. The goal of cross-strait dialogue should be to promote regional stability and peace and to avoid war, not to force the Taiwanese to capitulate. Taiwan's future should be decided by its people and its right to self-governance ought to be respected by the international community.
Chen talked of scrapping the National Unification Council and the unification guidelines, of joining the UN as Taiwan and of drafting a new Constitution in order to give Taiwan something to aspire to. If Taiwan continues along this road it will continue to have democracy, freedom and human rights, in the same spirit in which the US pursued independence over 200 years ago. The US should be pleased to see this happening and stand together with the Taiwanese, not throw us to the lions and put an end to the freedom we now enjoy.
Translated by Daniel Cheng and Paul Cooper
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS