Former president Lee Teng-hui's (李登輝) comment that it is unnecessary to pursue Taiwanese independence has been misunderstood and distorted by some people claim that he is giving up on independence. But Lee is actually emphasizing that Taiwan is already an independent sovereignty, and that what is important now is to improve the people's livelihoods, build national consciousness, and push for a name change and a new constitution, so that Taiwan can become a normal country.
In recent years, "Taiwan independence" theory and practice has been focused on whether a name change and a new constitution should be seen as declaration of independence, or whether Taiwan is independent, since it remains unable to enter the UN. It is indeed hard to imagine that these issues will be clarified, as there are several different interpretations of de facto and de jure independence.
The call for "Taiwanese independence" may confuse the international community, making them believe that Taiwan is a part of China. Thus, we may all be trapped by Beijing's logic that Taiwan is a part of China. Therefore, from the perspective of ensuring Taiwan's sovereignty, the discourse that the nation is already an independent state that does not have to pursue independence is undoubtedly the most feasible.
Still, we cannot ignore the fact that Taiwan is isolated internationally by China, while at the same time being hampered by the pro-unification camp and its boycotts. If the pro-independence camp ignores reality and gives an inch by looking for compromise, the pro-unification camp will take a foot. But if we face the problem squarely, unification-independence confrontation will occur, causing greater internal conflict. This is the sadness of Taiwan.
Another problem that must not be ignored is the poison left by the half-century-long colonial rule of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Consequently, any push for a name change and a new constitution would trigger fights between the two camps, proving that this is a real issue. This is why Lee deeply hurt the dark greens' feelings with the comment that the unification-independence issue was a "non-issue."
Nevertheless, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has undeniably treated the "real issue" of independence/unification as a "non-issue" during its seven years in power. For example, before elections, the DPP repeatedly calls for a name change and a new constitution, repeating the "one country on each side" and "Taiwan first" slogans, but then embraces economic integration, the active opening of direct cross-strait links, and reconciliation and coexistence promoting eventual economic unification after elections, forgetting all real issues such as the KMT's stolen assets, transitional justice, name changes, a new constitution and domestic investment.
I agree with the DPP's recent move to change the names of state-run enterprises, but these moves are merely a warm-up for the 2008 presidential campaign. If these steps had been taken in 2000 or 2004, they would have received much greater support.
I believe that for the sake of Taiwan, the argument over "independence" and "real issues and non-issues" inside the pro-independence camp should end now, and pro-green supporters should instead point their guns at the same target. Externally, we have to be aware that Taiwan is already independent; internally, we have to push for a change to the nation's title, a new constitution and domestic investment.
Unification-independence conflicts are inevitable issues in this process. There is no other solution apart from facing them head-on, because there is absolutely no middle path in the pursuit of Taiwan's independence.
Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser to the president.
Translated by Eddy Chang
While the nation grapples with its falling birthrate, it is also imperative to address how parents are raising their children. The phenomenon of “dinosaur parents” — who lash out at teachers, store staff or people on the street when confronted about their children misbehaving — has been an issue for a while, but there seems to be an uncomfortably high number of incidents making the news lately. On Saturday, a preschool teacher on an online forum wrote about a mother who often visited the school and screamed at the staff for various reasons — including her child being late to school
Americans tend to think of Vietnam as a war that split the US rather than as a country in today’s world. Vietnamese are of course way past that. The country does not have any US Electoral College votes, but if it did, they would be cast enthusiastically for US President Donald Trump. When I told a group of university students at a park in Ho Chi Minh City that I was from the US, they asked: “Do you know why we love Trump?” “Uhhh, is it because he hates China?” I asked back. “Yeah,” the group responded in unison. With a 1,000-year history of
Beijing’s media mouthpieces in Hong Kong last week reported that China is planning to create a list naming “die-hard Taiwan independence activists,” and that those on the list would be “severely punished” and “held accountable for as long as they live.” On Wednesday, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) said that “they and their financiers” and other supporters would be “cracked down on in accordance with the law,” although “the legal rights and interests of the wider population of Taiwanese compatriots” would be fully protected. With threats and division, in addition to military pressure, Beijing has now added this trick to its
According to newspaper reports, the Ministry of Education has responded to a teacher-student romance — between a 34-year-old female professor, surnamed Lin (林), and a male graduate student — that occurred several years ago while Lin was still an associate professor serving as the student’s master’s thesis adviser at National Taipei University of Technology. The ministry said the university’s lecturer evaluation committee has passed a resolution to issue a written warning to Lin for breaching her contract, and suspend subsidies for the department at which she teaches for one year. The ministry also said that the case fell under the