The announcement by President Chen Shui-bian (
Many tend to judge the matter from an election perspective. In view of Taiwan's long-term development, it in fact has brought the nation two major benefits to this point. The key to success lies in how we handle what comes next.
The significance of the nation's democratization is that the people enjoy sovereignty and independence. Taiwan is a de facto independent country. The sovereignty of the Republic of China (ROC) is the same as that of Taiwan. However, there are different views on the issue.
Some people celebrate the sovereignty of the ROC, not that of Taiwan -- though, most countries recognize neither Taiwan nor the ROC as a sovereign entity. The referendum makes a significant stride in manifesting the nation's sovereignty domestically and internationally.
Internationally, even though the US and Japan do not support Chen's decision to hold the referendum, they both sent prominent figures here to discuss the matter. This, as well as China putting pressure on Taiwan through the US, makes the "Taiwan issue" an international matter. This is remarkable progress.
Domestically, the referendum has provoked much debate. Debate is a form of discussion and communication which is conducive to building consensus. When most people revealed their desire for the right to vote in a referendum (although not as soon as Mar. 20), even the pan-blue legislators who opposed the Referendum Law (公民投票法) at first had to support it. This marks progress in the strengthening of the nation's sovereignty.
Still, we need to recognize the reality that although holding a referendum represents a form of democracy and fits the so-called universal values promoted by powers like the US, Taiwan's democratic movement is not welcomed in the international community. Obviously it is not necessarily okay to do what is right.
As a country in a weak position, Taiwan must be flexible. But this does not mean that we need to put up with whatever happens to us. Wisdom rather than tolerance is what we need in our dealings with big countries.
Both the US and China are using Taiwan as a bargaining chip. Provided that Taiwan constantly acts like a "good kid" who silently accepts oppression from powerful nations, it will eventually be sacrificed by them.
Usually, children who nag their parents for candy will eventually get some. So Taiwan has played its cards correctly by making a lot of noise about having a referendum.
Yet Taiwan cannot act arbitrarily or in disregard of the consequences.
Once the attempt to hold a referendum is made known in the international community, moderate measures should be taken to change Taiwan's position from that of a "determinee" -- a country whose fate is determined by others -- to a "participant" that makes decisions in the US-China-Taiwan relationship.
Amid the referendum uproar, US President George W. Bush reportedly sent an envoy here to ask the government to "do him a favor." If this is true, Taiwan can use this to bargain.
The international community recognizes the right of people here to vote in a referendum but does not want it to happen. Under such circumstances, the people should be pacified with some "candy" in return. The candy can be allowing Taiwan to be part of a free trade area, the World Health Organization and so on.
Chen's attempt to show his loyalty to the US was made very obvious upon his announcement of the referendum questions. It is worth observing whether Chen's concession was meant to alleviate the pressure on his re-election bid or to obtain more bargaining power.
Many people look at the two referendum questions with a mocking attitude. They think of them as a big joke as there is no need to hold a referendum on those two issues. But why don't we calm down and think?
It is because of the pressure imposed by the international community that the referendum questions are confined to such an extent that the people do not even have real freedom of expression.
Therefore, if we look at the issue from the perspective of fighting for international status for Taiwan, the referendum's symbolic significance far outweighs its functional significance. As long as Taiwan takes the unprecedented step of holding a referendum, neither the US nor China can easily ignore the will of the Taiwanese public.
Historically, accomplishments in democracy, human rights and national independence take 30, 50 or even 100 years. People who pursue sovereignty should know that such a goal cannot be reached in a single stride.
Small countries formerly under the Soviet Union did not walk down the path of autonomy and democracy until Russia was bogged down in an economic quagmire and security threats no longer existed.
Taiwan must seek international support so as to continue the fight. The weak cannot survive only on the basis of their reasoning but instead have to assess how much room they have to maneuver, what price they have to pay for "making trouble" and whether they can afford that price.
Fortunately, unlike Chechnya, and East Timor before its independence, Taiwan is already an independent country, not enslaved by external powers. The problem is that the international community does not recognize Taiwan and not enough consensus has been reached within the country.
It took the US 75 years after its civil war to agree on its identity. East Timor claimed independence with almost 80 percent public support. As Taiwan has spent 50 years on its way to an independent entity, we need to do more to achieve internal integration and consensus.
If there is no agreement within the country, how can we seek international support?
Teng I-jan is a Wealth Magazine columnist. The original Chinese text of this article appeared in the February issue of the magazine.
Translated by Jennie Shih
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS