On Saturday, two rallies were held to oppose China’s ambitions to annex Taiwan. One of them, organized by the Formosa Alliance in Taipei, used “Referendum yes! Annexation no!” as its main slogan, while the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) held a separate march in Kaohsiung under the slogan “No annexation! Defend Taiwan!” The main difference concerns their attitudes toward allowing referendums on national sovereignty.
Those who oppose such referendums say that independence cannot be achieved solely through such a process. They say that the international situation should be carefully assessed and foreign policies should be enacted that draw allies great and small, and gradually gain endorsements of the nation’s sovereign status. They say that the referendum demand could blur the focus of the Nov. 24 nine-in-one elections, while not helping to promote opposition to annexation.
They think that the nation’s sovereign status is not whatever Taiwanese want it to be, but also depends on the internal politics of the US and China.
Having won a great deal of power for himself, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) wants to wrong-foot his opponents by taking a hardline approach to Taiwan, so the nation could face a military invasion if it adopts adventurist policies.
As the US and China face off, some say that Taiwan should work in harmony with US strategy instead of making trouble. They say that by keeping an eye on developments, the space for national sovereignty could be slowly, but surely widened.
The Formosa Alliance says that the DPP has always guided Taiwan toward achieving direct democracy through a referendum on sovereignty to decide constitutional reform and the nation’s future.
However, the alliance complains that, since gaining a legislative majority as well as the presidency, the DPP has reneged on its promises by blocking attempts to amend the law to allow sovereignty-related referendums.
Over the past century or so, referendums have become a fairly common way to decide questions of sovereignty.
Alliance supporters say that for a nominally “democratic” and “progressive” party that was always talking about defending national sovereignty to oppose sovereignty-related referendums betrays its supporters’ expectations.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) calls for maintaining the “status quo” of the Republic of China, but her displays of goodwill and non-resistance to China abandon the boldness one would expect of a national leader.
Tsai said plenty of friendly things in her address on Double Ten National Day, but China still called her speech “hostile.”
Evidently, stooping low has not pleased the other side, so the alliance says there should be a sovereignty referendum to show that Taiwan is determined to defend its independence and oppose annexation.
The evolution of the nation’s democracy over more than three decades and its pursuit of universal values have attracted the US’ attention and made it want to include Taiwan in its counter-Chinese strategy. Rather than accusing Taiwan of making trouble, US President Donald Trump’s administration hopes the nation will stand by the US in saying “no” to China.
Not long ago, Taiwanese stood together in all weathers, facing riot police to win freedom and democracy. Hopefully Tsai will use her communication skills to make sure that the two trends “march separately, but strike together” instead of canceling each other out.
To do otherwise would look silly and make things easy for China and its supporters in Taiwan.
Lau Yi-te is chairman of the Taiwan Solidarity Union.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
The stocks of rare earth companies soared on Monday following news that the Trump administration had taken a 10 percent stake in Oklahoma mining and magnet company USA Rare Earth Inc. Such is the visible benefit enjoyed by the growing number of firms that count Uncle Sam as a shareholder. Yet recent events surrounding perhaps what is the most well-known state-picked champion, Intel Corp, exposed a major unseen cost of the federal government’s unprecedented intervention in private business: the distortion of capital markets that have underpinned US growth and innovation since its founding. Prior to Intel’s Jan. 22 call with analysts
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,