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
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS