On Sept. 21, Zogby International released the results of a US telephone poll commissioned by the Government Information Office (GIO). According to the poll, 55 percent of Americans believe "the UN should offer Taiwan membership." If Taiwan passes a referendum supporting a UN bid, 70 percent of the respondents said that "the US should not oppose the island nation's petition to join." This is exciting.
Although the outcome of this kind of referendum is not legally binding, public opinion at home will put pressure on Washington to improve its treatment of Taiwan.
This is reminiscent of when former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- after being humiliated during a stopover in Hawaii -- won strong US public support that later forced then US president Bill Clinton to approve Lee's visit to Cornell University.
We should pay greater attention to whether the referendums proposed by the pan-blue and pan-green camps can be passed and whether they should be combined.
Extremists in the pan-blue camp oppose combining the referendums because they believe the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to "one China." They also think that since China already has a UN seat, Taiwan should not apply for membership because that would create "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan." Thus, they hope the referendums will fail.
Similarly, pan-green fundamentalists oppose combining the referendums because they believe the two camps are different, as are their referendum proposals.
Referendum supporters think that if the total number of voters for the two referendums exceeds half of the total number of eligible voters, they can proclaim to the international community that the referendum supporting Taiwan's UN bid is passed.
Indeed, if neither referendum is passed on its own, this will be the only way to promote the result, but it would undoubtedly be very difficult to convince the world to accept such a claim.
The problem with such creative ballot counting is that the international community has always been controlled by power politics.
The rules of the game have been dominated by the leading powers and creativity has always been their privilege. It seems very difficult for a tiny country like Taiwan, which is often blocked even when playing by the rules, to have everyone accept its innovations.
Furthermore, China's international propaganda machine is much stronger than Taiwan's. Once Beijing points out that both referendums have failed, it will be difficult to make the world listen to Taiwan and not China.
If turnout for the presidential election is 75 percent, and if one third of pro-blue supporters do not vote in the referendums, it is question-able whether the number of people voting in the referendums will exceed half of the total number of eligible voters.
The pan-green camp has attacked the blue camp's proposal of "rejoining" the UN, rather than "joining," as fundamentally unfeasible.
If Taiwan wants to add the voters from one referendum to the voters in the other referendum it will be hard put to justify this to the international community.
The harm caused by two failed referendums would be enormous and the benefits if they pass are shown in the poll. Hence, the ruling and opposition parties must take immediate steps to remedy the situation for the sake of the country.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US