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
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS