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.
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
Much like the first round on July 26, Saturday’s second wave of recall elections — this time targeting seven Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers — also failed. With all 31 KMT legislators who faced recall this summer secure in their posts, the mass recall campaign has come to an end. The outcome was unsurprising. Last month’s across-the-board defeats had already dealt a heavy blow to the morale of recall advocates and the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), while bolstering the confidence of the KMT and its ally the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP). It seemed a foregone conclusion that recalls would falter, as
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
RSS