Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) caused a stir the other day by saying something that to many people is blindingly obvious — Taiwan needs a new constitution.
What was of particular note about this news was not that Lee called for the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution to be scrapped, but that so few other politicians or former national leaders voiced support for his proposal.
Not even former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was able to successfully challenge the vaunted piece of fantasy that is the ROC Constitution.
It is beyond comprehension that the 19th-biggest economy in the world lives under a Constitution that nobody, not even the people who enforce it — with the possible exception of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — believes to be a legitimate representation of reality.
The ROC Constitution, which was adopted by the National Assembly on Dec. 25, 1946, and went into effect one year later, was originally intended to apply to all of China. Today it is de facto law for only Taiwan and a few small islands, but continues to claim sovereignty over all of China, Tibet and Mongolia, not to mention parts of Russia that not even the People’s Republic of China (PRC) claims.
That Taiwan still uses this Constitution is the biggest roadblock to the nation ever becoming independent. The only countries that do recognize Taiwan’s independence are islands in the Pacific Ocean, a handful of countries in Africa and South American nations.
Why is it that only Lee, a retired statesman, is willing to call a spade a spade?
The ROC stands for the Republic of China, not Taiwan, and until politicians face this fact, Taiwanese will never be able to independently decide their own fate.
Taiwan being a democracy is irrelevant if the Constitution claims authority over China, Tibet and Mongolia — if a real representative referendum were held on Taiwan’s independence, how would the Chinese vote?
The main reason for not scrapping the Constitution is a practical one — avoiding war with China. The bottom line for the PRC is that the ROC never declares independence, and as long as Taiwan retains its current Constitution, it is doing just what China wants. However, Taiwan will never be an independent nation if this piece of legal fantasy remains in force.
If an elected government were to revoke the ROC Constitution or rewrite it in a way that defined Taiwan as an independent country, separate and equal to the PRC, the People’s Liberation Army would attack.
To turn Taiwan into an independent nation, it is an absolute prerequisite that the ROC Constitution be scrapped, but one that brings with it major risks.
The most likely scenario if this were to be done would be a war with China, and few politicians, not even those from the independence-leaning Democratic Progressive Party, are ready to face that challenge.
Until that is done, Taiwan will continue to be just part of China, as defined by the ROC Constitution.
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