Fri, Oct 06, 2017 - Page 8 News List

The Liberty Times Editorial: ‘Civil war’ to decide Taiwan’s fate

However, the New Party said it would take Lai to court for the offense of civil disturbance and submit a complaint about him to the Control Yuan. The New Party has taken the view that, as of now, the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution still defines the sovereignty of the ROC as including “the Taiwan area and the mainland area,” and for Lai, as the ROC’s highest executive official, to take it upon himself to change the status of the state contravenes the Constitution and related laws and regulations by separating Taiwan from the sovereignty of the ROC.

In the past, some in the DPP have also put forward the view that the Constitution represents a kind of constitutional “one China.” Would it not be ironic if maintaining “the existing ROC constitutional order” continues to cause clashes of identity and political disorder in Taiwan?

Some people call October “glorious” because there are so many public holidays in the month, but October also carries echoes of the historical conflict between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Even though most people in Taiwan see things from a Taiwanese point of view, some are still caught up between the conflicting views of China as the “motherland” and the “enemy country.”

Every October, a drama is played out between the alternative viewpoints that “the ROC’s sovereignty covers the Taiwan area and the mainland area” (ROC 1.0) and “Taiwan is a sovereign nation whose name is the ROC” (ROC 2.0), with each side expressing its own viewpoint and slamming those of the other.

These two schools of thought attach very different meanings to the words “Republic of China,” and they also do very different things. ROC 2.0 tendencies embody a new stage in Taiwan’s democratic evolution, while ROC 1.0 seamlessly connects with Beijing’s idea that “the mainland and Taiwan both belong to one China.” Pro-China unificationists in Taiwan act in tandem with the “enemy state,” using the ROC 1.0 system as a shield to solemnly and legally challenge the democratically structured ROC 2.0.

For the “enemy state” on the other side of the Taiwan Strait, ROC 1.0 and ROC 2.0 are targets for eventual destruction. In the past, when the Taiwan-centric trend had not yet surpassed 50 percent of public opinion and it was still possible to imagine government power alternating between the KMT and the DPP, the objectively existing ROC 2.0 might have been something that both political camps could accept, but following last year’s political sea change, the animosity between ROC 1.0 and ROC 2.0 has deepened, with frustrated politicians, retired generals, Chinese spies and gangsters using legal facades to conceal their illegal activities as they take up their respective positions to serve the “enemy state.”

All efforts to safeguard ROC 2.0 through identity cohesion, institutional reforms and national defense preparedness are always met with opposition for opposition’s sake in the legislature, while China’s five-star red flag has become a new street weapon. These things expose the fraudulent nature of those who oppose Taiwanese independence and support unification with China when they claim to be “safeguarding the ROC.” What they really are is a “fifth column” for China to annex Taiwan, but some members of this group still enjoy generous monthly pension payments and health insurance benefits.

This story has been viewed 1868 times.

Comments will be moderated. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned.

TOP top