Ever since Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was nominated as the party’s presidential candidate, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has been challenging her on cross-strait issues. However, the KMT should realize that cross-strait policy might not be that important and focusing on it might not take the party anywhere.
Since Tsai declared that her cross-strait policy would be to maintain the “status quo” and push for cross-strait exchanges on the condition of an equal footing, KMT politicians — including President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) — have been pressing her to elaborate on what she means by “maintaining the status quo,” while calling on her to recognize the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Although KMT lawmakers believe that the issue of cross-strait relations will play a key role in January’s presidential and legislative elections, it is really not that important for Taiwanese voters.
According to the results of an opinion poll conducted by the Taiwan Brain Trust and released on Wednesday, only 5.9 percent of respondents said that cross-strait relations are something the next president should prioritize.
So what do voters want the next government to focus on? As many as 62.9 percent of respondents said they wanted an emphasis on economic development, 12.4 percent said government efficiency should be improved, and 8.8 percent said social fairness and justice should be a priority. The issue of cross-strait relations was identified as the fourth-most important issue.
Most Taiwanese know that the cross-strait “status quo” might not change any time soon and there are more pressing issues — such as low salaries, rising living costs, high property prices, food safety and inefficient government — that they would rather see resolved as soon as possible.
The majority of Taiwanese want the nation to become independent, yet they are concerned that a formal declaration of independence might provoke a Chinese invasion. Therefore, at the moment, they would rather Taiwan remain a de facto nation.
A similar pattern can be seen in various opinion polls. No matter which organization conducts the poll, the option of “maintaining the status quo” always receives the most support. However, when the “maintaining the status quo” option is taken out and respondents are asked to choose between “Taiwanese independence” and “unification with China,” the majority of respondents go for “Taiwanese independence” instead.
The Taiwan Brain Trust poll also garnered similar results: While 61.4 percent of respondents said that Taiwan should become an independent nation, only 12.3 percent supported unification with China. Also, 87 percent of respondents identified themselves as “Taiwanese,” while only 6.1 percent considered themselves “Chinese.”
This is perhaps why Tsai declared that she would strive to maintain the cross-strait “status quo,” and her declaration has won the support of more than 50 percent of respondents in every opinion poll conducted since.
As the DPP advocates Taiwan’s de jure independence, some people might fear that voting for the DPP could provoke a Chinese invasion. However, now that Tsai has promised to maintain the “status quo,” people should have nothing to worry about.
On the other hand, the KMT might exacerbate people’s fears if it keeps promoting closer ties with Beijing.
If the KMT is smart, it would stop talking about cross-strait relations and focus on domestic issues.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS