This country's democracy is being thrown to the wolves, and few seem to care very much. Perhaps voters are so jaded and cynical that they believe there is no difference between democracy and autocracy. Or perhaps they are so tired of the lack of professionalism of their elected representatives that they are using apathy as a defense mechanism.
But the fact is that there are people who are actively trying to undermine the constitutional system of government, even as they openly conduct negotiations with a hostile foreign regime. These moves are threatening to undermine this nation's political system and create a state of de facto unification with China.
Such actions would be considered treasonous in most countries, and still the response from the nation's leaders -- with a few exceptions -- has been a mere "We'll take a look and see," while most of the public's response has been, "Will you change the channel?"
On Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) China policy director Chang Jung-kung (張榮恭) said that a Chinese official could be invited to Taiwan to take part in a dialogue between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the KMT. The official, Taiwan Affairs Office Director Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), is no minor functionary -- he is the CCP's No.1 man in charge of Taiwan policy.
Now, it was hardly surprising when former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) trolloped off on his Long March to pay obeisance to President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) -- after all, Lien is no great admirer of democracy, having lost virtually every election he's stood in. And if that weren't a striking enough example of the pan-blue alliance's willingness to surrender Taiwan's democracy and squander its sovereignty, then surely the People First Party's cross-strait peace advancement bill is.
Every Taiwanese should have a close look at this piece of legislation. After all, it would write into law that Taiwan is a province of China and that it is not a de facto independent state. Under one of the law's provisions, a person can even go to jail for talking about independence or questioning the "one China" policy.
Aside from the fact that this law would catapult the country back into the Martial Law era, it would also impose the fictional "1992 consensus" on Taiwan. But there is no consensus on how to proceed with China and the question of independence. And because there is no consensus, it is crucial that all debate be carried out in a public forum through democratic means.
The pan-blues' ploy is as obvious as it is dangerous. They are making a "declaration of war by the legislature against the executive," as Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) has said.
Because the pan-blues could not capture the presidency, they are using a slim legislative majority to usurp the powers of the Cabinet. They aim to place the powers of the executive branch into the hands of a parallel body, accountable only to the legislature.
It is to prevent such things from happening that the "separation of powers" and "checks and balances" are such vital components of democratic governments. No single group of extremists can be allowed to seize power through legislative legerdemain and impose unexamined policies on a powerless electorate.
By placing executive authority in the hands of the legislature, the pan-blues hope to effect a transfer of actual power, leaving them -- once again -- the unchallengeable rulers of Taiwan, free to reshape policy and law without oversight.
So the question remains. Doesn't this bother anyone?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
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
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
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
RSS