HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 4, 2003 Over the past few weeks, Taiwan has been debating, amongst rising popular and bi-party support, a referendum bill to put to popular vote two long-standing and politically contentious national issues. The leaders of Taiwan hope to use the referendum to 1) vote on entry to the World Health Organization; and 2) vote on whether or not to complete construction on the island’s fourth nuclear plant. The vote towards WHO membership would not carry any legal weight to decide the issue, however it would show a powerful display of popular will to the Geneva based WHO that has for years bowed to pressure from China to deny membership to Taiwan (whom China claims as a rebellious province). The nuclear plant has been an issue for nearly 20 years, as the decision was made (and construction contracts were signed) without popular knowledge or consultation by the authoritarian KMT government during the martial law period- long before Taiwan became a democracy. The residents of the area where construction has already begun (although it’s been on pause since 2000, when Taiwan experienced it’s first transfer of power from the KMT party to the Democratic People’s Party) have been fighting tooth and nail against the idea since its inception. Adding to the problem is that due to Taiwan’s relative small size, the disposal of nuclear waste is an as-of- yet unsolved dilemma. President Chen Shui-bian has called the referendum an ultimate expression of popular will dictating government policy, and a sign of maturation in Taiwan’s still-young democracy. The opposition KMT and PFP, initially opposed, have also embraced the idea with similar enthusiasm. You can imagine the surprise around the island, when it was reported that the American de-facto ambassador (America currently doesn’t officially recognize Taiwan as a nation), Douglas H. Paal, called President Chen to actively discourage the referendum idea. He feared that China would worry that it could lead to a referendum on independence (or more correctly- as Taiwan is already an independent, though unrecognized, state- a referendum on whether or not to unify with China—via all accounts, such a vote would lose by a 68-80~% margin) and provoke a Chinese military response. That was an incredible leap of imagination, and it has provoked much ire across the island. How could the USA, the vaunted protector of world democratic values, be discouraging a nation to decide fractious issues through democratic process. Well, I for one can see why many American politicians might take such a position. You can imagine the havoc that would be released if American voters were to decide for themselves some of the big issues of the day. The voters would overturn most every decision that they have been working so tirelessly to convince us that “the majority” (re. THEIR majority) supports. Yesterday, the Washington Post announced that pro-lifers are more numerous than pro-choicers. How long would affirmative action, social security, and most of the recent Supreme Court decisions stand if they were put to a popular vote. I’d guess not too long. It doesn’t matter what side of the political spectrum you find yourself, if you think about it, you’ll come up with a host of ideas where the will of the American people are opposed to what their elected officials are providing for them. Ironically, I think that, far from berating Taiwan from exercising their God-given rights, America may need to think about emulating them. ------------ Email Clay H. Williams: klei1842@hotmail.com Comment on this column in the forum. ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
