The Taiwan Professors Association (TPA) unveiled a draft "Constitution of the Republic of Taiwan" on Sunday. The draft suggests changing Taiwan's name from the Republic of China (ROC) to the Republic of Taiwan (ROT). It also suggests that we shrink the nation's territory to Taiwan and Penghu. As for Kinmen and Matsu, it suggests we grant residents of those islands the right of self-determination, so they can decide to declare independence, or to unify with Taiwan or China.
A group of professors with a strong local consciousness established the association in Taipei 14 years ago, when Taiwan was under the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) authoritarian rule. The group's members are from colleges and universities across the country. They were pioneers in Taiwan's democratization. From the abolishment of the National Assembly, establishment of direct presidential elections, the withdrawal of political and military forces from the media, to legislative reforms and other major issues, they have often taken the lead and roused the public through demonstrations, sit-ins and other activities. They have criticized unreasonable systems and lent their support to far reaching political reforms.
The Constitution is unsuitable in the present day. When it was written in China, Taiwan was still part of Japan. Representatives of the people of Taiwan never participated in the drawing up of the document. The KMT no longer rules China or Taiwan and the UN recognizes the People's Republic of China as the legitimate government of China. Yet the ROC Constitution states that its territory still includes all of the PRC as well as Mongolia. It is preposterous not to change the Constitution.
Taiwan's chaotic political situation stems mainly from the political parties' differences over national recognition and the scope of national territory. The TPA's assertion that the territorial issue should be settled through referendums and the writing of a new constitution that gives the people of Kinmen and Matsu the right to decide their own fate is worth supporting. Such a move would help end the internecine fighting in the legislature and in society.
But there are other important issues that must also be addressed: Whether to adopt a three-branch or five-branch government structure and whether to adopt a presidential system, a cabinet system or a dual-executive system. In order to ensure peace and security for future generations, Taiwan needs to re-engineer or at least make large-scale amendments to the Constitution to clarify these issues.
Both local and foreign constitutional experts as well as experts in legal and political affairs should be called in to assist in formulating a new constitution that meets the needs of a modern Taiwan. As to the debate over whether Taiwan needs to change its national title or its national flag, these are questions that can eventually be resolved by referendum.
But before embarking on the effort to overhaul the Constitution, the government must make it clear to the international community that such a move is absolutely necessary for Taiwan's continued survival and development. Without a new constitution, Taiwan will have no future, for internal conflicts will increase until they damage the nation's economic prospects.
Both the US and China should accept that the mainstream consensus within Taiwan is for a new constitution, for it is the natural result of democratization. It is not intended as a threat or an expression of enmity toward anyone.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
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
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS