Recently, umpteen pundits, particularly Americans, have repeatedly stated that the people of Taiwan were in favor of the "status quo." They said the Taiwanese would vote for "stability."
The implication of these dire warnings was that the KMT's Lien Chan (連戰) represented "stability," whereas Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the DPP somehow represented "radicalism" and "instability."
What are these spin-masters making of the election results? Do we Taiwanese want the "status quo" or do we want change?
It must be obvious that we do want change -- a change for the better. We want "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." We want a fair, just and open society. We want an end to the "black gold" politics perpetuated by 54 years of KMT rule.
We also want change in our international relations. We do not want to be treated as second-class world citizens and international pariahs. We want to normalize our relations with the rest of the world.
We now live in the 21st Century. More than 50 years ago, the UN was established on the basis of respect for human rights and self-determination. There should be no place in this world anymore for 19th Century warlordism.
The KMT's "status quo" gave only a false "stability;" in reality it bore the seeds of far greater instability, by giving China the chance to maneuver Taiwan into a corner from which it would be impossible to extricate itself.
Real stability only comes from the mutual respect of people and nations for each other's rights. It is the product of fair and just rules and laws. It does not come about through appeasement.
Real stability only comes when major actors hold firm to the principles of human rights and self-determination and do not let themselves be lulled into concessions in exchange for access to a hot air balloon Chinese market.
Real stability only comes when China accepts Taiwan as a friendly neighbor, and the US and other democracies embrace us as a full member of the international community and normalize their ties with our beautiful island. That should be the new status quo.
Chen Mei-chin is the editor of Taiwan Communique, based in Washington DC.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
On Sunday, 13 new urgent care centers (UCC) officially began operations across the six special municipalities. The purpose of the centers — which are open from 8am to midnight on Sundays and national holidays — is to reduce congestion in hospital emergency rooms, especially during the nine-day Lunar New Year holiday next year. It remains to be seen how effective these centers would be. For one, it is difficult for people to judge for themselves whether their condition warrants visiting a major hospital or a UCC — long-term public education and health promotions are necessary. Second, many emergency departments acknowledge
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
RSS