When it comes to the issue of Taiwanese sovereignty, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is the big brute sitting by the road armed to the hilt and collecting money to let people pass, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is a meek little coward that keeps messing things up.
The KMT has forced Taiwanese to accept a foreign constitution, and keeps saying such things as “the Republic of China’s [ROC] sovereignty encompasses all of China, including the People’s Republic of China [PRC]” and constructing fairy tales about being the only legitimate government of all of China. It is using these lies to hawk its party-state drug.
The DPP’s Taiwan independence clause declares the nation’s sovereignty and independence, that it does not belong to the PRC and that its sovereignty does not encompass China. Not only is this in line with historical fact, it reflects the actual situation. The clause is the only way to put the knife to the so-called “ROC Constitution” using democratic means.
So what is it that is so problematic with the clause? Why does the DPP want to scrap it or freeze it? There is nothing wrong with it.
The problem is that the DPP admits that it is incapable of changing the “one China” forged by the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and that it does not dare come near the red line China has drawn with its military threat. The DPP is incapable of implementing its party charter and leading Taiwan toward its ultimate goal of a proper constitution, yet continues to claim that Taiwan is already an independent and sovereign country. Although the party is a bit more humble and a bit more honest than the KMT, it is still quite far from the truth.
If Taiwan really was a sovereign and independent country as the DPP says, would DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) have to hide behind the Resolution on Taiwan’s Future or stress that the 23 million Taiwanese will decide the nation’s future? If Taiwan really was sovereign and independent and its future really was settled, then another decision by 23 million Taiwanese to that effect would be redundant.
The idea of deciding whether to freeze the clause based on the idea that Taiwan is already a sovereign and independent country is flawed. Taiwan may be sovereign and independent, but it cannot obtain the status of a regular country, because while sovereignty and independence are necessary requirements to obtaining national status, they are not the only requirements.
Former DPP legislator Julian Kuo (郭正亮), who wants to freeze the clause, says that the DPP is not striving to achieve independence, but to maintain it. This is disingenuous word play, because it separates independence from nationhood. Kuo, former DPP legislator Chen Zau-nan (陳昭南) and others have caused the DPP to lose its true nature. By asking the party’s Central Executive Committee to decide whether to freeze the clause, Tsai has highlighted the party’s problems rather than sweeping them under the rug.
Consider this comparison: This year is the 50th anniversary of Peng Ming-min (彭明敏), Hsieh Tsung-min (謝聰敏) and Wei Ting-chao (魏廷朝) publishing the Declaration of Formosan Self-Salvation. It is also Peng’s 90th birthday.
In Chinese writer Cao Changqing’s (曹長青) words, the declaration can be summarized in 12 words — “writing a new constitution, founding a new country and joining the UN.”
Do any of these three ideas not point toward self-salvation? Can any one of them be obfuscated by talking about “sovereignty and independence?”
Taiwanese do not have the time to play around “freezing the independence clause.” How long can they stand idly by and do nothing?
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with