Before the Beijing Olympics begin, Chinese authorities will have to think hard about how to react to the referendums proposed by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on UN membership for Taiwan.
It is far from certain, though, that the referendums Beijing is worrying about will pass.
When it comes to the referendums, there are four possible outcomes.
These are, in order of likelihood: neither referendum passes; only the referendum proposed by the KMT passes; both referendums pass; only the one proposed by the DPP passes.
Although more than 70 percent of Taiwanese are in favor of applying for UN membership under the name "Taiwan" -- meaning that Taiwan would apply as a new member -- the referendum the DPP proposes is the least likely to pass. In 2004, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) used Article 17 of the Referendum Law (公投法) to carry out a "defensive referendum."
But because the KMT and the People First Party boycotted the referendum, less than half of the 16.5 million eligible voters cast their vote, thus invalidating the result. The failure of the referendum on whether Taiwan should acquire more anti-missile weapons failed provided a convenient excuse for the KMT to obstruct the purchase of more Patriot anti-missile batteries in the past three years.
In June, the KMT's central standing committee passed the party's proposal on a referendum to return to the UN, meaning that the party wants to compete with the DPP and that it seeks to prevent its own voters from supporting a DPP referendum.
Let us assume that in the referendums next year, 17.5 million eligible voters will cast their votes. In the past few elections, turnout was approximately 80 percent, which for this election would mean approximately 14 million voters.
If these are divided equally between the DPP and the KMT, each party would receive approximately 7 million votes. If the two parties ask their supporters to only cast a vote in their own referendum, then neither referendum will be able to reach the threshold of 8,250,000 votes.
The most likely outcome, therefore, is that neither will pass. A referendum will only be successful if it is backed by a political party that really cares about the nation's international relations and thus calls upon its supporters to vote in both referendums.
The KMT obviously has no intention of doing so, otherwise it would not have proposed its own referendum in the first place. Whether the DPP is broad-minded enough to do this remains to be seen.
The only thing both the ruling and opposition parties care about is being in power. Regardless of whether either referendum passes, few people will really care about their impact once the presidential election is over.
If the DPP's referendum on joining the UN fails and the KMT's referendum passes, it will at least show that Taiwanese are not satisfied with their country's diplomatic isolation.
It would be a sad affair if the DPP -- the party that has for a long time pushed for joining the UN despite pressure and threats from the US and China -- would now be beaten by a party that calculated it could get more votes by following the DPP's example.
But it would still be less humiliating and have less impact than if both referendums were to fail.
Hence, the DPP should encourage its supporters to cast their vote in both referendums and not only in the one proposed by the DPP.
Lin Cheng-yi is a research fellow at the Institute of European and American Studies at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs