After the Scottish independence referendum ends, a new UK will surely emerge. Rather than having London as the core, there is now a call for a fairer balance of power throughout the union.
The flag of Scotland will now stand for more than just the blue backdrop to the Union Jack, as the Scottish people’s decision to remain in the union, through self-determination, has instigated the need for renewed negotiations on the UK’s constitutional arrangements. This referendum has precipitated a new understanding of what plebiscitary democracy means. Britain, an island state, set the standard for both plebiscitary democracy and nationalism in the 21st century.
What can Taiwan learn from the referendum process?
While the pro-unification and pro-independence camps might be more concerned about the outcomes from the perspective of their respective positions, this is perhaps a good time to examine Taiwan’s “birdcage” Referendum Act (鳥籠公投). The nation’s referendum process is pseudo-democratic, falling short of the more civilized standards seen in the Scottish referendum.
When Holyrood pushed for a referendum, the British Parliament at the Palace of Westminster — an instigator of modern representative democracy — did not pass a law to restrict the content of the referendum due to its fear of direct democracy. Nor did the British prime minister establish a referendum review committee to check whether a proposal was appropriate. The Scottish people did not have to collect 1 million signatures first in order to have the right to hold a referendum. Nor was a threshold imposed, so the ruling Conservative Party did not have to call on its supporters to boycott the referendum in order to nullify the results by ensuring that the threshold was not reached. As a result, there has been little controversy over the outcome, which was immediately accepted by the unification and independence camps, allowing the UK to concentrate on the future.
Of particular interest to Taiwanese was the nature of the question asked in the Scottish referendum: “Should Scotland be an independent country?”
There were only two simple choices — yes or no — while the referendum was implemented by a simple majority method. This is a civilized referendum system, a model that could point the way for furthering Taiwan’s democratization.
As a former member of the Cabinet’s referendum review committee, I used to support all the proposals during my term, irrespective of whether they were proposed by the blue or the green camp. Eventually, I chose to withdraw from the committee to show my protest against the unfair mechanism.
Today, many of my former colleagues serve as Examination Yuan and Control Yuan members or chair conglomerates. This highlights the barriers of interest to the civilization of Taiwan’s referendum system.
Thanks to the efforts of their ancestors, the Scottish people have been able to avoid the bloody wars that tore Ireland in two, and now they have had the chance to decide their own future through a referendum. The option was always there and has become an example for Taiwan’s democracy to follow.
Hsu Yung-ming is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at Soochow University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama