Reports that the US is opposing any form of Taiwanese referendum has caused the referendum debate to heat up once again. It is, however, quite surprising that the opposition and government have taken a common stance on opposing US interference in domestic politics.
What I find even more surprising is that it actually has been possible to create a debate about the US opposing any form of referendum in this country, since anyone with a little political sense knows that even if the US opposes a referendum on Taiwan's independence, it wouldn't use such strong language. The reasons why this debate has been heating up at this particular juncture are therefore questionable, for the following reasons.
First, the US has agreed to cooperate diplomatically with China in return for its help in dealing with North Korea. With Chinese demanding that the US clarify its stance on the Taiwan issue, the US leak to the press could be seen as a favor to the Chinese. Even though the leaked information may not coincide with the US position, it has fulfilled the US promise to China to make an "atypical" declaration of its position.
Second, the Kao Ming-chien (高明見) incident has weakened the position of the blue camp. It therefore leaked information that the referendum issue has become more serious, thus highlighting the dangers of the green camp playing with the independence issue in an attempt at saving the situation for the blue camp and unification.
Third, a legislative delegation is currently visiting the US. By the timely release of information that China has put a "red alert" label on a Taiwanese referen-dum, the US, on the surface of things, is simply forwarding the Chinese point of view. In fact, however, Taiwan has achieved longterm peace and stability by accepting US protection, and so long as Taiwan complies by paying its "protection fee," the US will not sit idly by.
This is why the heat has been turned up on the referendum debate at this moment. Add to this that the government cannot avoid holding a referendum next year, and it makes one wonder whether the US is playing its old game of using China to scare Taiwan into paying its fees a bit more willingly by threatening it with opposition to a referendum.
Leaving any conjecture about political plots to one side, my understanding is that the US is very firm in its position that any decision on the final status of Taiwan must have the unequivocal support of the Taiwanese people.
Taiwan is a sovereign entity, with its own people, government, land and sovereign wishes, and it of course has both the ability and the right to decide its own affairs through a vote. That China does not recognize this is another matter. The US is a nation that emphasizes the protection of democracy and freedom and it won't go so far as to openly interfere with or oppose the ability or rights of a sovereign Taiwan to vote to decide its own affairs.
To stress the "referendum spirit" in Taiwan's current political situation is recognition of the fact that the "Taiwan first" concept and the idea that residents should decide their own future have become the mainstream of public opinion. Given the strong Chinese pressure and the dispute over independence, we must actively search for a solution.
So, from a pragmatic point of view, how do we go about letting 23 million Taiwanese decide the future direction of this country? If we really want to realize this idea, we must pass the proposed referendum law (
Trong Chai is a DPP legislator.
Translated by Perry Svensson
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS