The cross-strait policy of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is to maintain the “status quo.” To prevent her policy from being used by powerful countries as an excuse to interfere with Taiwan’s internal affairs, I have two proposals to make:
First, the definition of “status quo” has to be physically empirical or directly related to something that is physically empirical. The former includes boundaries and territory, which means that maintaining the “status quo” could be a promise not to cross borders or invade and annex specific territories. The latter includes regulations on mutual physical conflicts that could be caused by altering the “status quo,” such as air defense identification zones, flight routes and the median line of the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwanese might dislike China’s “Anti-Secession” Law and the missiles it has targeted at Taiwan, but how China wants to write its laws and deploy its missiles is Beijing’s business, so long as it does not send troops to invade Taiwan or launch those missiles. By the same token, how Taiwan wants to write its laws, including the Constitution, or whether Taiwan welcomes US armed forces to be deployed here, is Taiwan’s business, so long as those armed forces do not invade China.
Second, domestic policy or legal reform cannot be seen as a move to change the cross-strait “status quo.” Since the Sunflower movement, calls for local reform have been growing louder and clearer, and the demand for transitional justice has also grown stronger. These forces are taking aim at the exploitative system and the ring of accomplices that encompass the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government, military and businesses that exist within the Republic of China (ROC).
The wealth that the KMT appropriated from the public during the Martial Law era is now being used to bribe local politicians to reject transitional justice. In the ROC, the military is legally prohibited from pledging allegiance to Taiwan, and high military leaders have partied with leaders of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), using the NT$300 billion defense budget paid for by Taiwanese taxpayers to create a playground for the military that has resulted in scandals like the Apache helicopter scandal.
Rich and powerful families in the KMT use their hereditary influence within the army to control the party and continue to pull the strings of the government, military and business. This is the main reason for the opposition between different social classes, the wealthy and the poor and between different ethnic groups in Taiwan.
The way to tackle these problems at their root is to enact a Taiwanese constitution based on a territory consisting of Taiwan and Penghu, so that there is a nation for the military to pledge allegiance to and ensure that transitional justice can be carried out.
Making such changes to a Taiwanese constitution is necessary to bring about domestic advancement. It also has nothing to do with China. Since its establishment, the People’s Republic of China has never exploited Taiwanese.
The reason that Taiwanese want rid of the ROC is that they want to overthrow the KMT’s rich and powerful families and their network of accomplices.
This is not a problem that China should concern itself with, and it certainly cannot be seen as a violation of the cross-strait “status quo.” If it did, Tsai’s DPP, the US and China would all become the guardians of and accomplices to Taiwan’s corrupt forces, would they not?
Lin Kien-tsu is a former director of Tamkang University’s International Business Department.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
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