Form a civil government
Chen Yi-chung’s (陳怡仲) opinion piece (“Taiwanese need to bone up on their Thoreau,” Oct. 31, page 8) had some suggestions on how to exercise the right of civil disobedience.
While it is encouraging to see people stand up for their rights, it is, however, not enough in the context of Taiwanese politics to stop at this level of protest.
Instead of hanging the Republic of China’s (ROC) “national flag” at home to counter the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) plan of hiding the “national flag,” it is time for Taiwanese to support a truly functional Taiwanese civil government outside the framework of the ROC Constitution.
Since it is now common knowledge that the ROC government does not plan to protect the sovereignty of Taiwan, Taiwanese can legally support their own civil government. The ROC government should move its office to Kinmen or Matsu because these are the only parts of the ROC administrative area that the ROC Constitution has included in its territory.
Besides, a temporary deployment of troops after a war should not last beyond a period of peaceful transition. An election would then have to be held to set up a civil government. In the case of dictator Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) Nationalist troops, the stay has become permanent, contributing to Taiwan’s identity crisis.
Furthermore, the rush to reconcile with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has put Taiwan’s democracy in jeopardy.
In order to protect Taiwanese democratic values, Ma must be reminded that he won the presidential election under a campaign platform that stressed the importance of the economy while promising Taiwanese self-determination.
However, Ma has incorrectly interpreted his victory as allowing him to proceed with determining himself what sovereignty means for the people of Taiwan.
What else can be more effective to counter Ma than supporting a civil government, an election under a new set of rules and abandoning the ROC’s unfair election rules?
The current KMT’s flip-flop policies are contrary to the policies of the Chiang era. Back then, Taiwanese could be jailed or sentenced to death if they sympathized with or supported Chinese Communism.
Now, half a century later, Taiwanese who oppose Chinese Communism and defend their own country can be prosecuted. What used to constitute treason is now the primary policy of the Ma administration.
After the presidential election in March, calls for fairly dividing the electorate and establishing a new referendum law have been ignored by the KMT.
Recent violence perpetrated by KMT-supported gangsters against Tainan City Democratic Progressive Party Counselor Wang Ting-Yu (王定宇) is a vivid example of the failure of the ROC’s public security and justice systems to protect the rights of Taiwanese.
After the 228 Incident, a number of political victims were killed — Chen Wen-cheng (陳文成) and the family of Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) — during the White Terror martial era.
Those killings remain unsolved today. There is simply no justice in a land of unfair rules. The Ma administration is challenging Taiwanese’ right to freedom and justice. Are Taiwanese left with any options under the ROC’s legislative and justice systems? The answer is very obvious: Within the current ROC Constitution, nothing can be achieved. It is therefore time for Taiwanese to support a functional Taiwanese civil government.
Alison Hsieh
Vyronas, Greece
Contaminated diet needed
The talk and hype surrounding the visit of Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) (“ARATS head to arrive today for talks,” Nov. 3, page 1) and all the previous and continuing problems of food contamination arriving from China reminded me of a scene from the movie Erin Brockovich, staring Julia Roberts.
A judge orders a trial to look into water contaminated by PG&E and Erin and her fellow lawyers are sitting opposite three other lawyers representing the company.
As the head lawyer is about to drink some water from a glass on the table, Erin tells her that it has been brought especially from the contaminated area for her to try.
This gives rise to the thought that as Chen is staying at the Grand Hotel for five days, why don’t we show him the same hospitality by giving him melamine-contaminated food to eat and inform him that we have “imported” it directly from China to make him feel more at home.
Michael Wise
Danshui
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