Taiwan New Constitution Foundation founder Koo Kwang-ming (辜寬敏), expressing frustration at what he says is President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) and the government’s reluctance to write a new constitution, on Sunday announced his intention to resign as Presidential Office adviser.
For Koo, a new constitution, for democratic Taiwan, is an indispensable step in the nation’s normalization.
He is absolutely correct in this, but that does not necessarily mean it is the direction the government should take the nation at this juncture.
The Republic of China (ROC) Constitution was not written with Taiwan’s topography, population, political or legal system, size or history in mind. It was written in, and for, another country entirely, maintained in Taiwan originally with the expectation that the exiled Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regime would return to China, and later to bolster the fiction that the ROC of the past, under the leadership of the KMT party-state, still bears relevance today.
It has been radically changed before to more adequately reflect the reality of the times.
Since relocating in exile to Taiwan alone, the KMT regime imposed the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of National Mobilization for Suppression of the Communist Rebellion, effective from 1948 to 1991, nullifying the Constitution and establishing martial law, and then implemented the Additional Articles of the Constitution (中華民國憲法增修條文), which were more relevant to Taiwan, in 1991.
Koo is completely right from a rational, practical point of view, but only if one agrees to ignore the elephant in the room: the threat of Chinese invasion.
For the KMT, the ROC is sacrosanct. The party and the state were separated by the nation’s democratization, but in the eyes of the party faithful the two concepts remain inextricably linked. The ROC is by no means integral to the existence of the KMT, but the party acts as if this were the case, which is why it will never change its name to something more fitting for its current circumstance as a major political party in Taiwan, not China: the KMT has no intention of ever giving up the notion that it represents anything other than China, even if it concedes that it will never again have control of the “mainland.”
It is within this context that the KMT leadership continues to perpetuate the idea that peace across the Taiwan Strait is guaranteed only when the integrity of the ROC is protected, albeit it only while ignoring Beijing’s assertion that the ROC no longer exists.
It is arguable that the KMT has a point, that the ROC and its Constitution need to be protected to ensure peace, as doing so avoids unilaterally changing the “status quo.”
Koo’s preferred option, of writing a new constitution and “rectifying” the country’s name, would absolutely constitute altering the “status quo,” but any clear-thinking person would know that the KMT’s strategy for maintaining peace is purely passive, quixotically kicking the can down the road, hoping the situation will change if the nation delays altering the detente long enough.
An administration headed by Tsai, Vice President William Lai (賴清德) and Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) is unlikely opposed to writing a new constitution, “rectifying” the nation’s name to Taiwan or working to normalize international relations. Yet Koo is right: there has been a marked lack of progress in this regard.
Where Koo sees reluctance and the KMT fears the loss of its own relevance, the government is exercising caution. The threat of conflict breaking out across the Taiwan Strait is real, and nobody in their right mind would risk that.
Reports about Elon Musk planning his own semiconductor fab have sparked anxiety, with some warning that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) could lose key customers to vertical integration. A closer reading suggests a more measured conclusion: Musk is advancing a strategic vision of in-house chip manufacturing, but remains far from replacing the existing foundry ecosystem. For TSMC, the short-term impact is limited; the medium-term challenge lies in supply diversification and pricing pressure, only in the long term could it evolve into a structural threat. The clearest signal is Musk’s announcement that Tesla and SpaceX plan to develop a fab project dubbed “Terafab”
In late January, Taiwan’s first indigenous submarine, the Hai Kun (海鯤, or Narwhal), completed its first submerged dive, reaching a depth of roughly 50m during trials in the waters off Kaohsiung. By March, it had managed a fifth dive, still well short of the deep-water and endurance tests required before the navy could accept the vessel. The original delivery deadline of November last year passed months ago. CSBC Corp, Taiwan, the lead contractor, now targets June and the Ministry of National Defense is levying daily penalties for every day the submarine remains unfinished. The Hai Kun was supposed to be
Most schoolchildren learn that the circumference of the Earth is about 40,000km. They do not learn that the global economy depends on just 160 of those kilometers. Blocking two narrow waterways — the Strait of Hormuz and the Taiwan Strait — could send the economy back in time, if not to the Stone Age that US President Donald Trump has been threatening to bomb Iran back to, then at least to the mid-20th century, before the Rolling Stones first hit the airwaves. Over the past month and a half, Iran has turned the Strait of Hormuz, which is about 39km wide at
The ongoing Middle East crisis has reinforced an uncomfortable truth for Taiwan: In an increasingly interconnected and volatile world, distant wars rarely remain distant. What began as a regional confrontation between the US, Israel and Iran has evolved into a strategic shock wave reverberating far beyond the Persian Gulf. For Taiwan, the consequences are immediate, material and deeply unsettling. From Taipei’s perspective, the conflict has exposed two vulnerabilities — Taiwan’s dependence on imported energy and the risks created when Washington’s military attention is diverted. Together, they offer a preview of the pressures Taiwan might increasingly face in an era of overlapping geopolitical