To connect Taiwan-centered groups and start a campaign to normalize and organize the effort to write a new constitution, the Taiwan New Constitution Foundation on Saturday established the Taiwan New Constitution Alliance.
The inauguration of the platform, held at National Taiwan University Alumni Hall in Taipei, is to be followed by the establishment of branches in cities and counties nationwide. Although there is wide support for writing a new constitution, most pro-independence groups are following their own agenda, making it difficult to get things going.
The Chiang (蔣) family-led occupation of Taiwan was a period of colonial rule, just like the period of Japanese rule. Taiwanese were not equal to the Chinese, which led to opposition to the regime.
The dangwai (黨外, “outside the party”) movement was a pro-democracy movement, but at a more fundamental level, it was also a Taiwanese independence movement aimed at overturning colonial rule. Members of the movement founded the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), making the first iteration of the DPP a revolutionary organization with the strong political belief of overturning the colonial regime.
At first, the DPP was poorly organized, and it relied on political faith to attract voters. The party therefore valued the support of Taiwan independence groups. These groups hoped that as the DPP matured everyone would work together toward the foundation of our own nation.
After the DPP became the governing party in 2000, independence advocates adapted their original call for overturning the Republic of China (ROC) to rectifying the nation’s name and writing a new constitution in the hope that they and the DPP would pursue that goal together once the party also controlled the legislature.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was originally opposed to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but after Taiwan’s democratization, it did an about-face and began befriending the CCP. The KMT called on Taiwanese to protect the ROC, but embraced the regime in Beijing, whose goal is to end the self-rule of Taiwan. This is a serious contradiction, and it has led to the public abandoning the KMT.
Meanwhile, the DPP has grown stronger and developed its organizational structure, and is now almost stronger than the KMT. Most importantly, the DPP has made the transition from a revolutionary organization to a democratic party. A revolutionary organization has a fierce political faith and wants to lead the public by the nose, while the goal of a democratic party is to govern. It therefore follows public opinion.
The DPP would not lose any votes if it followed its political beliefs, not to mention rectifying the nation’s name or writing a new constitution.
However, it is not even willing to abandon the ROC calendar, a calendar without any legal foundation, because it is afraid that any change it makes would be met with opposition from the pan-blue camp.
For the sake of a stable government, the DPP works to maintain the “status quo” and does not work with Taiwan independence advocates on changing the nation’s name or writing a new constitution.
For many years, proponents of the nation’s independence gave the DPP their unconditional support because they wanted to bring down the KMT. Now that most pro-independence advocates have been co-opted by the DPP, the party no longer pays attention to rectifying the nation’s name or a new constitution.
However, if those who still fight toward this goal unite, they would be able to influence the direction of the DPP.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a retired National Sun Yat-sen University professor and chairman of the Society for the Promotion of Taiwanese Security.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers