On Sept. 21, Zogby International released the results of a US telephone poll commissioned by the Government Information Office (GIO). According to the poll, 55 percent of Americans believe "the UN should offer Taiwan membership." If Taiwan passes a referendum supporting a UN bid, 70 percent of the respondents said that "the US should not oppose the island nation's petition to join." This is exciting.
Although the outcome of this kind of referendum is not legally binding, public opinion at home will put pressure on Washington to improve its treatment of Taiwan.
This is reminiscent of when former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- after being humiliated during a stopover in Hawaii -- won strong US public support that later forced then US president Bill Clinton to approve Lee's visit to Cornell University.
We should pay greater attention to whether the referendums proposed by the pan-blue and pan-green camps can be passed and whether they should be combined.
Extremists in the pan-blue camp oppose combining the referendums because they believe the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to "one China." They also think that since China already has a UN seat, Taiwan should not apply for membership because that would create "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan." Thus, they hope the referendums will fail.
Similarly, pan-green fundamentalists oppose combining the referendums because they believe the two camps are different, as are their referendum proposals.
Referendum supporters think that if the total number of voters for the two referendums exceeds half of the total number of eligible voters, they can proclaim to the international community that the referendum supporting Taiwan's UN bid is passed.
Indeed, if neither referendum is passed on its own, this will be the only way to promote the result, but it would undoubtedly be very difficult to convince the world to accept such a claim.
The problem with such creative ballot counting is that the international community has always been controlled by power politics.
The rules of the game have been dominated by the leading powers and creativity has always been their privilege. It seems very difficult for a tiny country like Taiwan, which is often blocked even when playing by the rules, to have everyone accept its innovations.
Furthermore, China's international propaganda machine is much stronger than Taiwan's. Once Beijing points out that both referendums have failed, it will be difficult to make the world listen to Taiwan and not China.
If turnout for the presidential election is 75 percent, and if one third of pro-blue supporters do not vote in the referendums, it is question-able whether the number of people voting in the referendums will exceed half of the total number of eligible voters.
The pan-green camp has attacked the blue camp's proposal of "rejoining" the UN, rather than "joining," as fundamentally unfeasible.
If Taiwan wants to add the voters from one referendum to the voters in the other referendum it will be hard put to justify this to the international community.
The harm caused by two failed referendums would be enormous and the benefits if they pass are shown in the poll. Hence, the ruling and opposition parties must take immediate steps to remedy the situation for the sake of the country.
Lin Cho-shui is a former Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS