After undertaking months' campaign to collect 1 million signatures endorsing its proposed referendum, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) had a sudden change of heart two weeks prior to election day and asked voters to boycott tomorrow's referendums -- including its own.
Making the decision during the KMT Central Standing Committee, the party justified its position by arguing that the "referendums have been twisted and kidnapped by the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] to be used as a tool to provoke conflict."
KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (
It is dumbfounding how easy it is for the KMT, in today's democratic Taiwan, to disregard the voices of millions in such a casual way: The opinions of a few Central Standing Committee members have effortlessly overruled the collective opinion of more than 1 million petitioners.
Taiwan has come a long way from the days of authoritarian rule. No direct presidential election was allowed and freedom of speech and the press was a pipe dream. Today, people can freely exercise their rights without fear that they could be dragged out of their beds in the middle of the night and disappear.
Some trumpet participation in referendums as the "people's right." But a closer look shows it would be more precise to say that it is the "people's privilege," because not every country practices direct democracy. With this is mind, anyone who is a proud Taiwanese should not easily abandon that special privilege by forsaking their referendum ballots.
It is not that surprising to hear calls from the KMT to boycott the referendums. After all, it was the pan-blue camp's actions that resulted in the "bird cage" version of the Referendum Law (
But anyone who respects the country's democratic pioneers and feels a sense of responsibility in defending the country's hard-won democracy should not allow themselves to be intoxicated by the KMT's anti-democratic rhetoric.
Two referendums will be held tomorrow -- one initiated by the DPP on recovering assets stolen by the KMT, and the other proposed by the KMT to empower the legislature to investigate misconduct of senior government officials and their families.
Whether individuals agree or disagree with the questions addressed in the two referendums, they should cast their referendum ballots tomorrow and make their voices heard.
Taking part in a referendum is a privilege but also an obligation from which each citizen of a democracy should draw pride.
The boycott proposal is not only an insult to voters, but also harmful to the nation's effort to consolidate democracy.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS