First suggested by a heavyweight of the independence movement, then backed by President Chen Shui-bian (
The core spirit of the constitutional proposal can be divided into two aspects. First, in terms of government system, a Cabinet would completely replace the current semi-presidential system. Second, in terms of national status, a second republic clearly states that it is the continuation of the "first republic" and the country therefore remains one and the same -- just like the first through the fifth French republics and the first and second French empires remained the same country, although the government system was repeatedly changed.
The proposed "second republic constitution" orders negotiations between the ROC and the People's Republic of China (PRC) concerning any kind of future political relationship, thus allowing the PRC a say in the nation's future and linking the two sides of the strait on the issue of Taiwan's national status.
The switch to a Cabinet system of government is now part of mainstream public opinion. It is also the mainstream opinion in academic circles and among legislators, and I am no exception.
As for Taiwan's national status, however, trying to maintain an unchanging national identity which includes the old China and the new Taiwan, while at the same time allowing Beijing to interfere with Taiwan's national status and constitution seems odd to a pro-independence activist like me. I am absolutely stunned to see such a proposal come from staunch Taiwan independence activists.
In my opinion, Taiwan's strategy should follow the trend toward a rising national consciousness, helping the growing awareness of a Taiwanese community mature further, rather than going against the trend by equating the old China with the new Taiwan. It cannot be denied that the new Taiwan shares a certain heritage with the old China, but past developments have disrupted this connection and it is now impossible to call the old China and the new Taiwan "one and the same."
Internationally, the president's announcement of his "four wishes" was quickly followed by Beijing stressing its firm opposition to de jure Taiwan independence, showing that China is fully aware that it is hard to deny Taiwan's de facto independence. As a result, the Beijing government is basically putting aside the controversy over Taiwan's sovereignty for the time being.
It is very unwise for Taiwan to open the door to negotiations at this moment. Once such negotiations are started, time will be on Beijing's side, while Taipei will be at a relative disadvantage given a constitutional order for cross-strait talks.
Not long ago, the People's Daily condemned the proposed constitution, which is already seen as Taiwan lowering its guard among independence activists. From a business negotiation perspective, Beijing is waiting for Taipei's next move while accumulating its own bargaining chips.
The president's push for a "second republic" is a violation of the independence camp's stance and it ignores the cross-strait reality and Taiwan's interests. It is a mechanism to force the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to enter negotiations regarding a new constitution. Indeed, apart from the change to the political system, the clear statements in the proposed constitution that the old and new systems are built on the same national foundation, linking Taiwan and China, both coincide with the KMT's current stance.
However, ever since it was defeated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in the 2000 presidential election, the KMT has automatically regarded any proposition by the DPP as a conspiracy. This has been their fixed mode of thinking over the past seven years. Therefore, if Chen really wants to bring the KMT to the negotiating table by proposing a second republic constitution, he may get just the opposite result.
Since this is probably the case, he should stop this mud fight immediately and simplify the constitutional amendment issue by focusing on the system of government and put an end to a possible constitutional crisis.
The proposed constitution puts both the maintenance of an unchanging state and the connection to the PRC in the preamble, much as in the original. Since this strategy for dealing with the national status is problematic, it would have been better to simply keep the old preamble and instead revisit the issue when Taiwan's national identity has matured further. As for the scope of the "second republic constitution," I believe that it is unnecessary to delve into too much detail, and the simplest way would be to simply add a small section to the preamble saying that cross-strait relations shall be regulated through special legislation.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with