Why the March 20 referendum is necessary

By Li Thian-hok , Jan. 31, 2004

In response to intense criticism by the Bush administration, the Taiwan government has modified the two topics of the March 20 referendum to the desirability of acquiring anti-missile weapons and negotiation with China. While somewhat mollified by the "flexibility" in the new language, a senior Bush administration official is wary that President Chen Shui-bian finds it necessary to hold a referendum on issues with obvious answers. The suspicion persists that the referendum is a campaign tactic designed primarily to enhance President Chen's chances for reelection. Such views, however, show that the Bush team is ill-informed on Taiwan's domestic politics and is not sufficiently attuned to the precarious situation of Taiwan, which faces not only China's growing threats of military aggression but also insidious forces of internal sedition, comprising elements of the pro-PRC KMT-PFP blue alliance, pro-capitulation media and some influential businessmen heavily invested in China.

The proposed referendum is not just a symbolic opinion poll which will produce no visible effect on public policy. Actually, at this juncture in Taiwan's history the referendum is indispensable if the island nation is to maintain the status quo, i.e., its de facto independent status free from China's political control. The referendum will serve several critical needs.

The KMT-PFP candidates have never gracefully accepted their defeat in the presidential election of 2000. The KMT-PFP blue alliance has obstructed virtually every legislative proposal the DPP government has made. Taiwan's citizens are fed up with unending partisan squabbles and government paralysis. A Referendum Law will enable the electorate to break the stalemate in the Legislative Yuan on vital issues.

A Referendum Law could also function as an insurance policy to protect Taiwan's sovereignty. Once this historic referendum takes place, the Law can be modified so that no change in the status quo can ever be implemented without the assent of the majority of Taiwan's citizenry, regardless of which political party is in power.

While the military balance is steadily and rapidly shifting in favor of China, many people in Taiwan including government officials, academia, the media and the general population seem oblivious to the impending danger. The referendum is a wake-up call to make people realize the need to bolster Taiwan's national defense and to prepare the people psychologically for a potential use of force or coercion by the People's Liberation Army.

A referendum provides a mechanism for the people to directly express their choice on important issues. It can deepen democracy by providing a remedy for the deficiency in the legislative body or government structure. If used judiciously and preceded by informed debate of the issues, a referendum can also serve to forge a national consensus and consolidate the national will on such a vital issue as the choice between freedom and servitude.

The March referendum may also call the attention of the international community to the PRC's expansionism and its ambition to annex Taiwan by force and coercion. The hope is that all peace-loving democracies will urge China to renounce the use of force against Taiwan and to respect the right of the 23 million people of Taiwan to decide their own future without outside interference, a right which is enshrined in the UN Charter.

The PRC has long insisted that any dialogue between Taiwan and China must be preceded by Taiwan's acceptance of the Chinese claim that Taiwan is part of China. The March referendum can highlight the fact that it is China's unreasonable precondition which is preventing any substantive negotiation between the two sides. Bush administration spokesmen keep advising Taipei that a referendum serves little useful purpose, that dialogue is a better approach. Such remarks show the Bush team is either confused or uninformed. Surely the US government is not suggesting that Taiwan should unilaterally alter the status quo by surrendering its sovereignty to the People's Republic? If the Bush administration is so keen on dialogue, it should pressure the PRC to drop its intransigent precondition.

The US should refrain from interfering in Taiwan's domestic politics and from micro management of Taiwan's referendum wording. A critical stance toward President Chen and the referendum will be counterproductive, since a KMT-PFP victory in March could well result in a drastic disruption of the status quo, for example, unilateral surrender of Taiwan's freedom within a couple of years. Remember Lien Chan's proud declaration during a visit to Washington, D.C.: "Thank God, I am 100 percent pure Chinese."

If the Bush administration is genuinely concerned about PLA military adventure in reaction to either the referendum or the March election outcome, it should build up a robust deterrence posture in the vicinity of the Taiwan Strait, as mandated by the Taiwan Relations Act and recommended by the DOD report of the Quadrennial Defense Review which was issued shortly before September 11, 2001. Certainly the war against terror is important. But Washington may imperil its significant strategic interests in East Asia by failing to act in time.
1/27/04