Exactly a decade ago today, university students and civic groups from throughout Taiwan congregated in the Legislative Yuan in a demonstration against the then-ruling Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) hasty attempt to pass a proposed Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement.
Apprehensive that the agreement might allow Beijing to put Taiwan’s autonomy in severe jeopardy via economic means, protesters occupied the legislature and chanted slogans to voice their outrage.
Initially, the government stood firm on its intent to implement the agreement, with demonstrators dispersed by police force and water cannons as they endeavored to expand their activities to the Executive Yuan. However, after generating widespread support among the public, the protesters eventually succeeded in compelling the government to revoke it.
This later became known as the Sunflower movement, the largest mass demonstration in Taiwan since democratization.
Many attribute the consolidation of Taiwan’s democracy to the movement, believing that it successfully prevented China from influencing Taiwan’s population demographics. They also complimented the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for enabling Taiwan to become an integral part of the global economy through its rejection of the agreement.
As time passed, the Sunflower movement gradually faded from Taiwanese’s memories. However, it has resurfaced in recent months after Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) advocated for the resumption of negotiations on the service trade agreement in June of last year.
The remark immediately drew intense backlash, as many accused him of exploiting the protest to bolster his mayoral campaign in 2014, only to later abandon its core intention.
TPP legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), one of the leading figures in the demonstration, also received harsh criticism for endorsing Ko in this year’s presidential election, despite Ko’s ambiguous stance on the enforcement of the cross-strait treaty.
After the presidential election, similar concerns have continued to arise upon the KMT and TPP’s recent proposal to shorten the naturalization process for Chinese spouses.
Opponents of the proposal contend that as Chinese nationals are not required to relinquish their nationality prior to their acquisition of Taiwanese citizenship, the Chinese government could easily take advantage of these naturalized citizens to manipulate the election outcomes, thereby posing a threat to Taiwan’s sovereignty. They also argue that exempting Chinese spouses from taking the citizenship test could cast doubt on their allegiance to the country, which could imperil Taiwan’s national security.
Polling from TVBS News showed that 89 percent of all respondents disapproved of the plan to shorten the citizenship application procedure for Chinese immigrants, which indicates that the opposition parties’ proposition is at odds with the opinion of the majority.
Worried that the proposal might place a heavy burden on the national healthcare system, thoracic surgery division doctor Tu Cheng-che (杜承哲) launched a petition campaign against the proposal on Feb. 27, which attracted more than 90,000 signatures within three days.
Just a decade from the abandonment of the CSSTA, a proposal that would have had detrimental consequences for the nation, it is ironic that a bill on Chinese spouses is being deliberated in the legislature.
Both would potentially render the nation’s political structure more vulnerable to Chinese influence. Hence, critics of the opposition parties’ proposal have urged them to act in adherence to public opinion — lest the same mistake committed 10 years ago be repeated.
Reflecting upon the Sunflower movement’s legacy, it is imperative that we not only recognize the significance of cherishing democracy and resisting foreign aggression, but also hold politicians accountable, ensuring the voices of their constituents are upheld in the legislature.
More importantly, maintaining democracy requires the concerted cooperation of the entire society. Communication must therefore be regularly held between political parties and citizens, so that the overall interests of Taiwanese can be thoroughly safeguarded.
Tshua Siu-ui is a Taiwanese student studying international relations and politics in Norwich, England.
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS