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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS