After reading the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) article by Lee Min-yung (李敏勇) on Feb. 19, I agree with his view that “because of the remnants of the Republic of China [ROC], the illusion of existence within another government’s system, Taiwan has yet to complete the construction of a sovereign independent state. Supporters of the ROC need to look at this plight.”
The ROC government-in-exile has occupied Taiwan for more than 60 years, resulting in great harm to Taiwanese.
The media have recently been discussing the so-called “1992 consensus,” the “1996 consensus,” a “constitutional consensus,” a “Taiwan consensus” and other political slogans. These are just slogans created to mislead the public. They do not help solve the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty and independence.
Some people are also just using elections to gain power within the system. However, the existence of the privilege elected officials enjoy does not solve the issue, either. Taiwan is still trapped in the system of the ROC government-in-exile.
Thirteen years ago, in the article “Taiwanese Sovereignty, Independence and the Republic of China,” my late husband, C.C. Yang (楊基銓), concluded that “the only way is to clearly define the distinction between Taiwan and China — the clearer the better — and believe that if we do all these, Taiwan can gain the acceptance of all countries and emerge to become a truly sovereign and independent state.”
Over the years, I pondered why Taiwanese always want to struggle for power within the system. Why not use historical evidence and principles of international law to break away from the ROC government? Is it because of the selfishness of Taiwan’s political figures?
The recent incident of the Philippine government sending Taiwanese fraud suspects to China is the product of the system of the ROC government. If you don’t want to break away from the system, you can only blame yourself and not President Ma Ying-Jeou’s (馬英九) administration.
To save Taiwan from Chinese annexation, we should all recognize this fact and work on breaking away — as soon as possible — from this government-in-exile system.
Yang Liu Hsiu-hwa is chairman of the International Cultural Foundation.
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry