Form a civil government
Chen Yi-chung’s (陳怡仲) opinion piece (“Taiwanese need to bone up on their Thoreau,” Oct. 31, page 8) had some suggestions on how to exercise the right of civil disobedience.
While it is encouraging to see people stand up for their rights, it is, however, not enough in the context of Taiwanese politics to stop at this level of protest.
Instead of hanging the Republic of China’s (ROC) “national flag” at home to counter the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) plan of hiding the “national flag,” it is time for Taiwanese to support a truly functional Taiwanese civil government outside the framework of the ROC Constitution.
Since it is now common knowledge that the ROC government does not plan to protect the sovereignty of Taiwan, Taiwanese can legally support their own civil government. The ROC government should move its office to Kinmen or Matsu because these are the only parts of the ROC administrative area that the ROC Constitution has included in its territory.
Besides, a temporary deployment of troops after a war should not last beyond a period of peaceful transition. An election would then have to be held to set up a civil government. In the case of dictator Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) Nationalist troops, the stay has become permanent, contributing to Taiwan’s identity crisis.
Furthermore, the rush to reconcile with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has put Taiwan’s democracy in jeopardy.
In order to protect Taiwanese democratic values, Ma must be reminded that he won the presidential election under a campaign platform that stressed the importance of the economy while promising Taiwanese self-determination.
However, Ma has incorrectly interpreted his victory as allowing him to proceed with determining himself what sovereignty means for the people of Taiwan.
What else can be more effective to counter Ma than supporting a civil government, an election under a new set of rules and abandoning the ROC’s unfair election rules?
The current KMT’s flip-flop policies are contrary to the policies of the Chiang era. Back then, Taiwanese could be jailed or sentenced to death if they sympathized with or supported Chinese Communism.
Now, half a century later, Taiwanese who oppose Chinese Communism and defend their own country can be prosecuted. What used to constitute treason is now the primary policy of the Ma administration.
After the presidential election in March, calls for fairly dividing the electorate and establishing a new referendum law have been ignored by the KMT.
Recent violence perpetrated by KMT-supported gangsters against Tainan City Democratic Progressive Party Counselor Wang Ting-Yu (王定宇) is a vivid example of the failure of the ROC’s public security and justice systems to protect the rights of Taiwanese.
After the 228 Incident, a number of political victims were killed — Chen Wen-cheng (陳文成) and the family of Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) — during the White Terror martial era.
Those killings remain unsolved today. There is simply no justice in a land of unfair rules. The Ma administration is challenging Taiwanese’ right to freedom and justice. Are Taiwanese left with any options under the ROC’s legislative and justice systems? The answer is very obvious: Within the current ROC Constitution, nothing can be achieved. It is therefore time for Taiwanese to support a functional Taiwanese civil government.
Alison Hsieh
Vyronas, Greece
Contaminated diet needed
The talk and hype surrounding the visit of Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) (“ARATS head to arrive today for talks,” Nov. 3, page 1) and all the previous and continuing problems of food contamination arriving from China reminded me of a scene from the movie Erin Brockovich, staring Julia Roberts.
A judge orders a trial to look into water contaminated by PG&E and Erin and her fellow lawyers are sitting opposite three other lawyers representing the company.
As the head lawyer is about to drink some water from a glass on the table, Erin tells her that it has been brought especially from the contaminated area for her to try.
This gives rise to the thought that as Chen is staying at the Grand Hotel for five days, why don’t we show him the same hospitality by giving him melamine-contaminated food to eat and inform him that we have “imported” it directly from China to make him feel more at home.
Michael Wise
Danshui
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS