It was heartening to see high-ranking officials from the US and the UK publicly countering Beijing’s military threats against Taiwan after Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) early this month said that China reserved the right to use force to bring Taiwan into its fold.
Still, the foreign officials, however friendly they might be, missed one crucial point, which the Democratic Progressive Party government unfortunately failed to act on and assert Taiwan’s sovereignty in the international arena.
US National Security Council spokesman Garrett Marquis on Jan. 6 tweeted: “The US rejects threats or the use of force to compel the people of Taiwan. Any resolution of Cross-Strait differences must be peaceful and based on the will of the ppl on both sides.”
Separately, British Minister of State for the Commonwealth and UN Tariq Ahmad on Jan. 14 said: “In line with our long-standing position on Taiwan, we encourage Taiwan and China to engage in constructive dialogue to resolve this issue, taking into account the views of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.”
The Presidential Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly expressed their gratitude to the officials, adding that Taiwan would continue to work with like-minded nations to ensure peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
While the government’s response represented Taiwanese’s peace-loving nature and the nation’s willingness to work for regional peace and prosperity, it failed to clarify Taiwanese’s right to self-determination.
The problem with the foreign officials’ remarks is: Why does Taiwan’s future have to be “based on the will of the people on both sides” of the Strait?
Article 2 of the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution states that “the sovereignty of the Republic of China shall reside in the whole body of citizens,” who are described in Article 3 as “persons possessing the nationality of the Republic of China.”
Therefore, only people who hold ROC citizenship can decide the nation’s future, not the citizens of the People’s Republic of China.
By staying mum on remarks that suggest that the nation’s future should be determined jointly by Taiwanese and Chinese, the government has unwittingly allowed the international community to disregard Taiwan’s existence as a sovereign state.
Would Singapore’s future be based on the will of Malaysians? Should Burmese decisionmakers take into account the views of people in Thailand? The answer is obviously no, as each of those countries is a sovereign state that is neither dependent on nor subjected to another country.
Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation, and the suggestion that Taiwan take into account the views of 1.42 billion Chinese is ludicrous — not to mention unconstitutional and grossly negligent of Taiwanese public opinion.
A survey conducted by National Chengchi University’s Election Study Center in April last year showed 85.6 percent of respondents saying that the future of Taiwan and cross-strait relations should be collectively decided by the 23 million Taiwanese.
As citizens of a sovereign state, Taiwanese have the right to determine their own future. This power must not be usurped and the government must make sure that no country ever dreams of seizing Taiwanese’s hard-won rights and freedoms.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS