US Republican Stephen Yates, a friend of Taiwan, is questioning the Taiwanese people’s determination to become independent, but the reason is not only that the US and China are strongly opposed to the idea (“Taiwan not ready for independence,” Aug. 6, page 6).
Yates reportedly said that “Taiwan is not ready” and that if Taiwanese were “willing to trade their lives, assets and sacred honor for Taiwanese independence, they would win the support of the international community.”
This could be seen as a well-intended warning and the only question is whether there is any solid evidence to show that the Taiwanese “are not ready.”
Not long ago, Yates visited the Presidential Office in Taipei and he also met with many politicians both from the governing and the opposition parties.
Yates’ judgement, then, is based on the government’s opinion, and President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) wants to “maintain the status quo,” so it is not a matter of not being ready, it is a matter of not making preparations for independence at all.
From this perspective, perhaps Yates has only listened to the official position and ignored public opinion. A referendum in Taiwan would have nothing to do with the president or any political party: Everyone -— the president, legislators and all 23 million Taiwanese — has one vote.
Are the Taiwanese ready? There is no way to know. Taiwan has never held an independence referendum, so how could we know?
The people have a constitutional right to hold referendums and the president or the legislature have no right to continue to ignore the issue.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) spent the past 60 or 70 years making a mess of Taiwan. Is the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) now going to continue to do the same thing?
Passing the Referendum Act (公投法) amendment is a responsibility the DPP cannot shirk.
Let us also look at the two different international reactions Yates mentioned.
First, there is strong US opposition. Who is the US opposing? A referendum is the collective expression of public opinion. Are they opposing 23 million individuals?
Former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) UN referendum was initiated by the government, so the US could put pressure on the president.
This is a referendum that would be initiated by the public, and the public would vote in it and there is nothing the president or the ruling party could do to stop it, so who would the US oppose?
Then there is strong Chinese opposition. Will China be opposed? Of course it will. There is no need to wait for a referendum: It will be upset as soon as the amendment to the Referendum Act is passed. Do we Taiwanese need to worry? No.
Once the amendment has been passed, Taiwan will have one more bargaining chip when dealing with China, as it can hold an independence referendum whenever it wants. The people can also choose not to hold one and they can vote in support of it, or they can oppose it.
As China puts pressure on the nation, it must consider the reaction of Taiwanese. This is a reaction that is backed up by a whole warehouse full of gunpowder.
During the celebrations marking the founding of China’s People’s Liberation Army, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) threatened Taiwan, and the DPP’s response that he was “far removed from Taiwanese public opinion” was far too lame.
With an amended Referendum Act, “Taiwanese public opinion” would not be an empty word and China would need to give serious thought to it before making threats and rattling its sabers.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Chinese state-owned companies COSCO Shipping Corporation and China Merchants have a 30 percent stake in Kaohsiung Port’s Kao Ming Container Terminal (Terminal No. 6) and COSCO leases Berths 65 and 66. It is extremely dangerous to allow Chinese companies or state-owned companies to operate critical infrastructure. Deterrence theorists are familiar with the concepts of deterrence “by punishment” and “by denial.” Deterrence by punishment threatens an aggressor with prohibitive costs (like retaliation or sanctions) that outweigh the benefits of their action, while deterrence by denial aims to make an attack so difficult that it becomes pointless. Elbridge Colby, currently serving as the Under
The Ministry of the Interior on Thursday last week said it ordered Internet service providers to block access to Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu (小紅書, also known as RedNote in English) for a year, citing security risks and more than 1,700 alleged fraud cases on the platform since last year. The order took effect immediately, abruptly affecting more than 3 million users in Taiwan, and sparked discussions among politicians, online influencers and the public. The platform is often described as China’s version of Instagram or Pinterest, combining visual social media with e-commerce, and its users are predominantly young urban women,
Most Hong Kongers ignored the elections for its Legislative Council (LegCo) in 2021 and did so once again on Sunday. Unlike in 2021, moderate democrats who pledged their allegiance to Beijing were absent from the ballots this year. The electoral system overhaul is apparent revenge by Beijing for the democracy movement. On Sunday, the Hong Kong “patriots-only” election of the LegCo had a record-low turnout in the five geographical constituencies, with only 1.3 million people casting their ballots on the only seats that most Hong Kongers are eligible to vote for. Blank and invalid votes were up 50 percent from the previous
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi lit a fuse the moment she declared that trouble for Taiwan means trouble for Japan. Beijing roared, Tokyo braced and like a plot twist nobody expected that early in the story, US President Donald Trump suddenly picked up the phone to talk to her. For a man who normally prefers to keep Asia guessing, the move itself was striking. What followed was even more intriguing. No one outside the room knows the exact phrasing, the tone or the diplomatic eyebrow raises exchanged, but the broad takeaway circulating among people familiar with the call was this: Trump did