Despite an apparent consensus on lowering the threshold for constitutional amendments, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has thrown cold water over Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) proposals that the threshold be lowered.
The KMT’s objections have renewed attention to a Feb. 4 article published by the China Review News Agency (中國評論社) that criticized former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) for presuming to speak for the constitutional reform movement. The article said it was obvious that the Taiwanese independence faction was attempting to rewrite the Constitution under the guise of merely making amendments, adding that reducing the threshold for constitutional amendments was akin to opening Pandora’s box. It pointed to the storm kicked up in 2004 when then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) tried to initiate constitutional change, and the US warned him against making any major moves involving territorial sovereignty.
A lot can happen in 11 years, and it is not necessarily the case that any moves now will result in similar tensions. Also, it was the US that invented the tactic of rewriting a constitution by introducing constitutional amendments. Following World War II, when US forces occupied Japan, the US forced Japan to accept a “foreign constitution” drafted by US lawyers within Allied Command, under the guise of “amending” the Meiji Constitution. Most Japanese only realized what happened after US forces left.
In 1952, with the end of the occupation and full restoration of Japanese sovereignty, there were calls for a new constitution. To this day, nothing has changed, although recently Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, with the blessing of the US, has been in the process of effecting constitutional change.
I am not Japanese, so I cannot comment on why the Japanese have accepted a foreign-imposed constitution all these years. However, the Japanese political commentator said Ito Tetsuo that Taiwan and Japan have something in common, in that both nations have developed a kind of taboo mentality when it comes to seeking a new constitution.
The idea of lowering the threshold for constitutional reform is not entirely unreasonable, especially with regard to the political and military situation in the Asia-Pacific. In addition, the independence movement is actually quite restrained. With the exception of the preface, the contentious part of the Additional Articles of the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution is changing the ROC’s existing national boundaries. At present, the threshold to amend these is the same as that for amending the Constitution, but these are dealt with in separate articles.
Therefore, a high threshold for existing territory, as mentioned in Article 4, could be retained. Meanwhile, the threshold for constitutional amendments as mentioned in Article 12 could be lowered. For the independence faction, Taiwanese and for the international community, retaining a high threshold for independence or unification would provide a welcome security wall.
If a referendum on independence or unification fails, it could well be 10 years before another is held. Therefore, supporters of independence might find a two-stage referendum the best option. This would involve an initial proposal to lower the threshold for changing the “existing territory” and, if agreed, it would show that the public is psychologically prepared for a referendum on unification or independence. If, the proposal is rejected at the initial stage, it would show that the time is not yet ripe.
Christian Fan Jiang is deputy convener of the Northern Taiwan Society’s legal and political group.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS