XCHAIRMAN YOU COMPLETES TRIP TO THE

PHILIPPINES.………………………….......1-2
XAMBASSADOR BOLTON EXPRESSES SUPPORT FOR
TAIWAN’S UN 
REFERENDUM.........................................2-3 AUGUST 2007
XTHE DPP’S PATH TO VICTORY IN 2008 –
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ‘NORMAL COUNTRY
RESOLUTION’..........................................4-7

XFROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE TAIWAN RELATIONS
ACT, US SHOULD RE-EVALUATE ITS ONE CHINA
POLICY...................................................8-9
XPUBLIC OPINION SHOWS OVERWHELMING SUPPORT
FOR TAIWAN’S UN REFERENDUM………...9-10
XOVER 70% OF THE PEOPLE AGREE THAT TAIWAN IS AN

democracy &
INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN COUNTRY…10-11
X’JOIN THE UN UNDER THE NAME OF TAIWAN’
PETITION...............................................11-13
XAUGUST SURVEY  RESULTS ON THE UN REFERENDUM.
ISSUE........................................14-15

A MONTHLY NEWSLETTER PUBLISHED BY THE DPP’S

progress
DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Chairman You completes ‘United For Victory’ trip to

the Philippines, ‘Taiwan for UN’ Referendum Proposal
Receives Wide Support
Chairman You Si-Kun of the DPP successfully finished his “United For Victory” visit to the
Philippines on the 11th of August. You stated that the trip was fruitful both because his promotion

of the DPP’s concept of a “normal country” resonated with Taiwanese abroad, and also because
he met with many Filipino governmental officials who unanimously support the Taiwan for UN
membership referendum. A visit to Thailand was originally planned as part of the agenda, but

due to Chinese intervention visas to Thailand were not granted to You and his entourage.
This visit allowed DPP officials to meet with DPP
members in the Philippines and make speeches

focused on the normalization of Taiwan and the

“Normal Country Resolution.＂ The overseas
Taiwanese community responded well to the visit

and also provided many valuable suggestions.

Chairman You presenting Senate President Manny
Villar with Taiwanese tea and rice after a successful
Chairman You reiterated that his meeting with
President of the Senate Manny Villar as well as
senior officials including President Franklin Drilon of
the Liberal Party was related to security issues in

meeting. the Asian-Pacific region. During these exchanges,

the
Taiwan for UN membership referendum was mentioned and subsequently unanimously
supported by the officials. While in the Philippines, You expressed that he felt the weight of
political pressure from China continued on page 2
2 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 1.

due to not only the rejection of their group visas to Thailand, but also
DEMOCRACY &
newspaper advertisements placed by pro-China figures. Chairman You
PROGRESS
pointed out the pervasiveness of China＇s constant intervention in
Department of International
Taiwan＇s affairs and emphasized the importance of boldly
Affairs

Democratic Progressive Party surmounting such obstacles to develop Taiwan＇s international

8F, No. 30, Pei-Ping East Rd. relations.

Taipei, Taiwan

t. 886-2-23929989 ext. 305 Ambassador Bolton expresses support for

f. 886-2-23214527
e-mail: foreign@dpp.org.tw
web: http://www.dpp.org.tw
Taiwan’s UN Referendum and calls for the US
to reestablish diplomatic relations with
Taiwan

Director
DPP Chairman You Si-kun highly commended John R. Bolton, Former
Lai I-Chung
US Ambassador to the UN, for Bolton’s August 14th speech in which he

Editor-in-Chief: demonstrated approval of Taiwan’s membership in the UN, supported

Michael Fonte Taiwan’s right to conduct referenda, and echoed the DPP’s advocacy of
diplomatic relations with the US. Chairman You pointed out that instead
Editor: of being constrained in an old-fashioned policy framework, Bolton’s
Roger Lee Huang
appreciation of the democratization of Taiwan provides a positive attitude
that is beneficial for the normalization of the US-Taiwan relations.

At the lecture hosted by the Taiwan Foundation

for Democracy, Bolton pointed out that UN
Resolution 2758 was not adopted legitimately.
Bolton added that it is the decision of the
Taiwanese people, and not China, to decide
under what name Taiwan should join the UN.
Bolton also urged the US not to oppose Taiwan’s
referendum, and also establish official
diplomatic relations with Taiwan, thus clearly
showing US support for Taiwanese democracy.

Chairman You stated that various polls have

shown over 70% support for “Using the name Chairman You Si-Kun, Secretary General Lin Chia-Lung, and
Taiwan to enter the UN” and “a referendum on Director Lai I-Chung held a welcoming luncheon for
entering the UN”. Ambassador Bolton and his wife Gretchen Smith Bolton.
continue on Page 3
3 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 2.

Over 80% of respondents opposed the statement “Taiwan is part of China”. This, Chairman
You said, reflects a mainstream consensus that supports the “One China, One Taiwan” and
“Taiwan for UN” proposals. Denouncing the international community’s apathy towards

Taiwanese public opinion as violating the principle of international justice, You described
other states’ refusal to accost China not only as assisting a dictatorial government
suppressing a democratic state, but also as a perpetual threat to the survival of Taiwanese
democracy.

Chairman You further praised Ambassador Bolton’s supportive attitude towards Taiwan, as
Bolton not only accepts and respects Taiwan’s democracy and its right to participate in the
international community, but also sees Taiwan as a “success story for democracy,” and not
as “a troublemaker in the Taiwan Strait.”

DPP Chairman You believes that in contrast with the thirty-year old American ‘One-China
Policy,’ Bolton’s recognition of the democratic realities in Taiwan and Taiwan’s right to

conduct referenda will benefit Taiwan-US relations in the long run.

Bolton echoed the DPP’s August 13th call for the reestablishment of diplomatic relations

between Taiwan and the US. Chairman You believes that if Washington endorses such a
proposal, it will help oust the zero-sum game created by the so-called ‘One-China Policy’
and create a legal precedence for Taiwan to stand on equal footing with China in the

international community.

Lastly, DPP Chairman You stated that with the support of our international friends, Ma
Ying-jeou and the Kuomintang should renounce their opposition to Taiwanese
independence and their platform of eventual unification. Given Ambassador Bolton’s
support for using the name “Taiwan” for Taiwan’s application to join the United Nations, Ma
should not criticize this widely supported referendum. Most importantly, Ma should not
work against public opinion by promoting the unacceptable concept of “one China with
different interpretations” and “one Taiwan with different interpretations.” Chairman You
concluded that the only way for Taiwan to survive in the future is to believe in democracy
and the will of the people.
4 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

The DPP’s Path to Victory in 2008 -- The Importance

of the ‘Normal country Resolution’
DPP Chairman You Si-kun

To win the 2008 legislative and presidential elections is the DPP’s ultimate goal. But
how can we win the support of the Taiwanese people?

The Unwavering Path: Sovereignty, Justice, Reform

In my view, there are three important conditions for victory in the 2008 election:
vision, solidarity, and anti-vote-buying. It is especially important for us to hold on to
our original core values and party spirit on issues of ‘sovereignty’, ‘social justice’, and
‘reform’, which should serve as guidelines to clearly establish our determination to
fight against the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and to reignite the
passion of our supporters, thus winning the trust and support of the people.

The Root of the Problem: Taiwanese versus Chinese Identity

Many people assumed that the victory of the DPP in 2000 signified that the Taiwanese
people were finally able to fulfill their century-old desire to become masters of the
country and its future. However, the reality proved more complicated, as the struggle
between a truly indigenous Taiwanese government and the KMT intensified, with the
KMT choosing to identify itself with China and strategically joining forces with the CCP
against Taiwan. What should have been a democratic competition between political
parties thus was turned into a battle over contradictory identities. The source of all
these problems is rooted in the problem of conflicting national identities.

Crisis of Sovereignty: The Impasse of the “Republic of China”

Taiwan is a country, and its sovereignty rests with its people. However, since the
Second World War, Taiwan has been using the title of the Republic of China (ROC), as
well as an outdated Constitution and political institutions. These old remnants have
hampered Taiwan’s international relations, and also created abnormal domestic
developments in politics, economy, society, and culture.

In recent years, an increasingly powerful China has repeatedly changed the so-called
status quo in the Taiwan Strait by using its influence to oppress and threaten Taiwan
on a worldwide basis. In continuing to refer to itself as the ROC, Taiwan is unable to rid
itself of the shadow of “One-China”, and as a result it has caused a rapid deterioration
in Taiwan’s status as a sovereign state.
continued on page 5…
5 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 4…

In July this year, President Chen sent two letters to Ban Ki-Moon, the UN
Secretary-General, to apply on behalf of Taiwan for UN membership under the name
Taiwan. However, on both occasions, the applications were rejected. The
Secretary-General claimed that Resolution 2758 states that the People’s Republic of
China (PRC) is the sole legal representative government of all of China, and that the
UN’s position is that Taiwan is a part of China. Clearly, ROC no longer has the space to
exist or survive in the international community.

The Only Answer: New National Name, New Constitution, UN Membership

How are we to find a way out of this dangerous situation? Generally speaking, there
are three options for Taiwan:

Option 1: The route the KMT advocates, which is “Unite with China, a common market,
and ultimate unification.” Everyone knows of course that this is as good as
surrendering outright and committing suicide!
Option 2: This is the maintenance of what we commonly refer to as the status quo. As
a matter of fact, we have always maintained the ‘status quo.’ The reality is
that it is the PRC that continues to change this ‘status quo,’ which will continue
to be detrimental to Taiwan. Choosing this option will only guarantee a
diminishing international space for Taiwan, and Taiwan will not be able to
survive. Ultimately this is as good as committing a slow suicide.
Option 3: The third route is to get rid of the historical ROC baggage and China forever,
and to fulfill the long-standing dream of the Taiwanese people, namely to
change the name of our country, draft a new Constitution, and to become a
member of the UN, thus establishing Taiwan as a normal country.

I believe that both internationally and domestically speaking, the conditions are right
for us to choose this option. This option is not only the mainstream opinion and view
of the Taiwanese people; it is also the only viable option for Taiwan’s survival.

Public Opinion Trend: Taiwanese Identity and Independence

A recent poll shows that people who identify themselves as Taiwanese now account
for a historical high of 64.9%, while those who see themselves as Chinese have
decreased to a historical low of 17.4%. People identifying themselves as both
Taiwanese and Chinese have also slipped to an unprecedented low of 13.9 percent.

continued on page 6…
6 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 5…

Even people commonly referred to as ‘mainlanders’ have increasingly identified

themselves as Taiwanese (39.2%). This is the first time in history that more people in
this group have seen themselves as Taiwanese rather than Chinese (37%).

According to our recent survey on the issue of unification or independence for Taiwan,
those who support independence have reached 49.3% of all respondents. The number
of people in favor of unification, however, has slipped to 23.5%, a historic new low.
Clearly, the emergence of a Taiwanese national identity and support for independence
has led to a greater mainstream consensus of the Taiwanese people.

Election Crisis: Lack of Passion and Direction for Our Supporters

During the last two years, the ratio of KMT to DPP supporters has narrowed to an
approximately 5-6% gap, putting the DPP in a better situation than ever before. Yet
a closer look at the levels of support that pan-blue and pan-green supporters show
each party’s candidates paint a different picture.

On August 14th, the latest poll indicated that support for Frank Hsieh, the presidential
candidate of our party, slipped to 26.7% from 34.9% in May. Support for the KMT’s
Ma Ying-jeou, however, has remained constant around 46%, even though he was
indicted on corruption charges. The poll gap between Ma and Hsieh has widened to
17.2% from 11.3% in May.

Furthermore, KMT and People’s First Party (PFP) supporters are more united in their
support for Ma, with 92 % and 89.7 %, respectively, backing the pan-blue candidate.
Yet the figures for Hsieh from DPP and Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) supporters is
quite low, at 82.2% and 67.9%, respectively.

The polls show that pan-green supporters lack unity. This will be the greatest
challenge for us in the 2008 election.

The Foundation for Victory: “Normal Country Resolution”

Our past election experience has taught us that only through the strong support of our
core supporters can we gain the support of swing voters.

I firmly believe that the “Normal Country Resolution” is critical for consolidating our
power base and developing a consensus among our supporters.
continued on page 7…
7 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 6…

Such a resolution will demonstrate to our core supporters that the DPP has not
changed its fundamental values, and will help to establish a unified vision and goal,
thus leading the way to our electoral victory.

Finally, I wish to make an appeal to all the people of Taiwan. For the sustainable
development of our country, the realization of social justice, and for our future
generations to enjoy their rights as citizens of a normal country, it is time for us to be
decisive and unite.

Together, let us tell the world: we need a new name! We want a new constitution! We
want and deserve membership in international organizations under our name Taiwan!
Let us rid ourselves of an outdated system, and release ourselves from the myth of
ROC and China that still binds us to the past! We need to create a country that truly
belong to the people of Taiwan, and lead Taiwan on the path towards a new and
normal country.

Taiwanese/Chinese Identity(All voters)

Taiwanese Chinese Both
100

90

80

70 64. 1 63. 2 64. 9

62. 3 62. 3

60 54. 0
47. 1
50

40 34. 8 33. 5
32. 1 31. 5 27. 1
30 23. 2
18. 3 18. 3 19. 6
16. 9 17. 4
20 28. 4 28. 6
20. 6 17. 8
10 15. 2 15. 0 14. 7 14. 4 13. 9

1995 avg 1996 avg 1999 avg 2002 avg 2003 avg 2004 avg 2005 avg 2006 avg 2007 avg of
first half of
the year

Source: DPP Survey Center

Note: There is no data for Taiwanese/Chinese identity in 1997, 1998 and 2000. Results from

2001 are not shown here as the question used in 2001 differs from other sets of data.
8 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

From the Perspective of the Taiwan Relations Act,

the United States should reevaluate its One China
Policy
Dr. Lai I-Chung, Director of DPP Department of International Affairs

Recently there has been a keen interest in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). Aside from
the actual contents of the TRA, and its position regarding the status of Taiwan, the
TRA also stipulates provisions regarding Taiwan’s participation internationally, as well
as the US position regarding the Cross-Strait status quo. Consequently, USA’s ‘One
China Policy’ also revolves around these issues, both of which are critical to Taiwan’s
survival and future. A deeper understanding and review of the contents of the TRA,
will also reveal that the current USA’s ‘One China Policy’ differs from the spirit of TRA.

One example is the recent dispute regarding ‘Joining the UN, under the name of
Taiwan.’ Last year, when the US State Department spokesman was asked a question
regarding ‘Joining the UN, under the name of Taiwan’, the spokesman responded that
this was a unilateral change of the status quo. However, this statement contradicts
Section 4.d. of the TRA, which states that, “[n]othing in this Act may be construed as
a basis for supporting the exclusion or expulsion of Taiwan from continued
membership in any international financial institution or any other international
organization.”

In fact, the problem is not limited to the issue of ‘Joining the UN, under the name of
Taiwan.” For example, the Clinton Administration stated in its 1998 ‘Three No’s Policy’
that ‘we don’t believe that Taiwan should be a member of any organizations for which
statehood is a requirement.’ This statement likewise directly violates and contradicts
of course Section 4.d. of the TRA.

Various senior officials, including the former Director of the Office of the Republic of
China Affairs Ambassador Harvey Feldman, Vice-President Richard Cheney, and
former Asian Security Consultant Stephen Yates had all criticized the Clinton
administration on this point. Therefore, in accordance with the sprit of the TRA, the
USA should rethink its opposition towards Taiwan’s bid to enter the World Health
Organization (WHO) and any other international organization.

continued on page 9…
9 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 8…

Furthermore, current US management of the cross-strait relationship is also

problematic. The formula of ‘No Taiwanese independence, and no Chinese use of
force’ provides a narrow definition of ‘Chinese force’ which is limited to the military
sense. This narrow definition also contradicts Section 2.b. of the TRA which states that
the US will “maintain the capacity… to resist any resort to force or other forms of
coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the
people on Taiwan.” China’s adoption of the Anti-Secession Law, which legitimizes
‘non-peaceful means’ against Taiwan, as well as the economic embargos and the
deliberate marginalizing of Taiwan’s economic cooperation with other countries, have
already directly threatened Taiwan’s survival. It is thus especially important to review
the provisions of the TRA in order to fully grasp how China has already resorted to
‘non-peaceful means' that would jeopardize Taiwan’s security.

Theses examples all reflect the incoherent US ‘One China Policy’ that contradicts the
provisions contained in the TRA. They have nothing to do with America’s failure to
acknowledge Taiwanese sovereignty, nor with the issue of diplomatic relations
between Taiwan and the US. Instead, they have everything to do with the desire of
the Taiwanese people to participate and join international organization blocked by
China, China’s hostile denial of Taiwanese sovereignty, and the ongoing economic and
political marginalization of Taiwan. By adhering to this so-called ‘One China Policy,’
the United States seriously contradicts the spirit of the TRA. If the TRA’s binding
power is greater because it is a piece of legislation, as opposed to the Three
Communiqués, then it is not only reasonable but legitimate to point out the
contradiction between the One China Policy and the TRA, and for the US to rethink the
fallacy of its One China Policy.

Public Opinion Shows Overwhelming Support for the

DPP’s UN For Taiwan Referendum

According to an August 31st survey conducted by the DPP, 62% of respondents

believe that the UN for Taiwan Referendum directly reflects the will of the people.
Roughly equal numbers of pan-green and pan-blue supporters agree on this point.

46 percent of the respondents believe joining the UN under the name of Taiwan does
not change the status quo, while 36 percent disagree. A further breakdown of the
continued on page 10…
10 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 9…

survey shows that over 75% of swing voters and pan-green supporters agree that the
referendum proposal does not change the current status quo, while 56 percent of
pan-blue supporters hold the opposite viewpoint.

Of those surveyed 69% affirm their continued support for the proposed referendum,
despite recent discouraging and disparaging remarks made by the US officials.

A separate survey conducted by the Taiwan Thinktank in July also showed similar
results. An overwhelming 84% majority of Taiwan’s youth between the ages of 20-29
support the UN for Taiwan Referendum, which they believe best reflects the will of the
people in regards to the UN membership issue.

In July, numerous participants of the International Federation of Liberal Youth (IFLRY)

Dallas convention voiced their support for Taiwan’s application to join the UN.
Moreover, according to Department of Youth Development Director Chou Yung-hong,
these international friends further emphasized the importance for Taiwan to show
their consensus and determination to the world, in order for the international
community to truly understand Taiwan’s isolation.

This UN Referendum will elevate the position of the Taiwanese people onto the global
stage, and the referendum results will confirm Taiwan’s dream of official recognition
and acceptance in the international community.

Over 70% of People Agree that Taiwan Is an

Independent Sovereign State

A series of polls conducted on the issue of Taiwan’s UN Referendum by the DPP Survey
Center show a steady increase in the number of people supporting the measure, with
the majority of the population wishing to apply for UN membership under the name of
Taiwan. Regardless of their party affiliation, the majority of those surveyed expressed
support for the referendum. Only 18.1% of the respondents disagree with the
proposal.

The survey, conducted on August 23rd and 24th, reflected steadily increasing support
for the ‘Joining the UN, under the Name of Taiwan’ referendum. Currently 75.6% of all
respondents affirm their support for the referendum, a five percent increase from the
March 7th survey. The poll also sought to ascertain Taiwanese views on the
continued on page 11…
11 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 10…

independence issue. Up to 74% of the respondents identified Taiwan as an

independent sovereign state, while only 11.3% viewed Taiwan as part of China. The
same August poll also showed that 57.2% of respondents supported formal
Taiwanese independence, 29% wished for eventual unification, and 7% preferred the
status quo. The results signified a historical high for those seeking Taiwanese
independence, with little change towards those who support eventual unification with
China.

When asked if they considered themselves Taiwanese or Chinese, 69% responded

that they consider themselves Taiwanese, 17.7% as Chinese and 9.2% as both.
These combined results reflect the ongoing, deepening trend of Taiwanese
national identification and localization, which in turn leads to an increase in
support for the independence movement.

The Democratic Progressive Party represents Taiwanese who support the

continued self-governance of Taiwan. It works towards transitional justice,
as well as the preservation of Taiwan’s sovereignty and independence. The
DPP preserves the dignity of our state through close cooperation with the
international community, with the ultimate goal of realizing Taiwan as a
normal country.
There’s something odd going on with the font here… you might want to
check it.

‘Join the UN under the Name of Taiwan’ Petition

Proposed Resolution
In 1971, the People’s Republic of China replaced the Republic of China as a member of
the United Nations, thus making Taiwan an international orphan. In order to strongly
express the will of the Taiwanese people, and to elevate Taiwan’s international status
and international participation, do you agree with the government to use the name
‘Taiwan’ to enter the United Nations?

Reason for this Petition

In 1971, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 2758, thus allowing the
People’s Republic of China to join the United Nations, and became ‘China’s sole
representation.’ Prior to this, the Republic of China was recognized as the only legal
government of China. However after the adoption of Resolution 2758, the PRC
continued on page 12…
12 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 11...

became the only legal government of China represented in the UN. Additionally, the
PRC began to replace the ROC in other international organizations and agencies
associated with the UN.

In recent years, Taiwan’s wealth of development experience has become a valuable

and important asset suitable to share with all of humanity. It is the wish of the people
of Taiwan to bring our experiences to the global stage, and to fulfill our obligation to
the international community by becoming a member of the UN. Thus, since 1993 the
government has searched for ways for Taiwan to join the UN.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through the help of our diplomatic allies, had hoped to
establish a ‘Special Committee’ in the UN General Assembly to discuss a workable
scheme for Taiwan to join the United Nations.

Additionally, we had also requested the UN General Assembly to review, recall, or

amend Resolution 2758 (adopted in 1971), in order to achieve a ‘Divided Country
Parallel Representation’ model, using the name ‘Republic of China’ or ‘Republic of
China on Taiwan.’ In the 1999 proposal, we requested that the UN General Assembly
establish a ‘working group’ to study the issue of Taiwan joining the UN. In 2000, after
the first ever democratic change of government in Taiwan, in theory a new UN
strategy reflecting this democratic change should have been adopted. However, due
to the ‘Divided Government’ realties in domestic politics, the government has been
unable to reevaluate and amend the traditional policy regarding the case of ‘Taiwan’s
membership to the UN’, and had to continue to follow the 1999 proposal. However,
due to the strong opposition of China, none of Taiwan’s proposals have ever gained
inclusion on the formal agenda of the General Assembly. This old strategy was too
passive, aimless, and without a clear target, and thus gradually marginalized, having
received no coverage by the international media. In fact, many people in the
international community do not even realize that Taiwan is excluded from the UN.

In the UN, Taiwan is frequently asked, “What do you want?” Resolution 2758 clearly
states that the ‘People’s Republic of China ’is the ‘sole legal government of China.’ The
‘Republic of China’ has consequently already lost its legitimacy in the eyes of the
United Nations and its associated agencies. Between 1945 to 1971, when the ROC
represented China in the UN, it represented all of China, rather than Taiwan only.
Based on the above thinking, in the future when we are asked,”What do you want?”
our answer will be very clear: we want to become a new member of UN under the
continued on page 13…
13 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 12...

name ‘Taiwan.’ This new paradigm is based neither on the ‘Parallel Representation’
model, nor ‘One Country, Two

Representations’, nor the cancellation of or amendments to Resolution 2758.

Joining the United Nations as an official member is an arduous task for Taiwan, as it
would the support of a majority of member states in the General Assembly. Therefore,
only by emphasizing that Taiwan is a sovereign independent country can we counter
China’s ‘One China Policy’, as well as the claim that “Taiwan is a province of China.”
How then can we show Taiwan’s sovereignty? A national referendum is the best option.
The truth is, the ROC method in the UN cannot work. In the long term, the
international community can learn to gradually accept and support the name ‘Taiwan.’
By employing the tool of a national referendum, we can demonstrate our collective will
and also further emphasize the ridiculousness of excluding 24 million people of Taiwan
from the UN.

MOFA had repeatedly maintained that there are various methods for Taiwan to
participate in the UN, including the option of applying under the name ‘Taiwan.’ Yet
during the last decade, we have never seen MOFA using the name ‘Taiwan’ to apply for
UN membership. The main reason is that many people think that the existing Republic
of China Constitution limits this option. As Article One of the Constitution stipulates
that “The Republic of China, founded on the Three Principles of the People, shall be a
democratic republic of the people, to be governed by the people and for the people,”
MOFA was previously hesitant to use the name ‘Taiwan’ when applying for UN
membership. In other words, one can argue that the current constitution restricts
Taiwan’s participation in the international community.

How do we break free from this dilemma? Again, holding a national referendum is the
best option. In accordance with the principles of democracy, a national referendum
strongly reflects the collective will of the country’s citizens. It represents a supreme
power that supersedes any existing laws or documents, including the Constitution.
The national referendum ‘Joining the UN, under the name of Taiwan’ is the only way to
transcend the limitations set by the Constitution, and to demonstrate the collective
will of the Taiwanese people.
14 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

August Survey Results:

Survey Dates: August 31-September 4, 2007

Total respondents: 837
Margin of error: ±3.4%

Table 1: Will the UN Referendum undermine or maintain the status quo?

Question: There are people who believe "Promoting the use of the name 'Taiwan' to
join the United Nations will undermine the status quo," and there are also people
who say "Promoting the use of the name 'Taiwan' to join the United Nations will
maintain the status quo." With which statement do you agree most?

Undermine Status No
Maintain Status Quo Total
Quo Opinion
36.2% 46.7% 17.1% 100%

Table 2: Is American opposition to the UN Referendum contrary to its most

important democratic values?

Question: Some people say "Referenda are a direct expression of public opinion.
Therefore, American opposition to a Taiwanese referendum on joining the UN is
contrary to its most important democratic values." Do you agree or disagree with
this type of statement?

Strongly Somewhat Strongly

Somewhat Agree No opinion Total
Agree Disagree disagree
41.3% 18.5% 10.4% 14.0% 13.9% 100%
Total 'Agree': 61.6% Total 'Disagree': 27.9%

continued on page 15…

15 DEMOCRACY & PROGRESS

continued from page 14…

Table 3: Should Taiwan accommodate the wishes of the United States in regards to
the UN Referendum?

Question: Some people believe, "The US expresses its opposition to Taiwan holding
a referendum to join the United Nations, therefore we should accommodate the US
and not promote the referendum." Do you agree or disagree with this type of
statement?

Strongly Somewhat Strongly

Somewhat Agree No opinion Total
Agree Disagree disagree
9.0% 12.6% 9.9% 22.8% 45.8% 100%
Total 'Agree': 21.6% Total 'Disagree': 68.6%

Table 4: Should Taiwan continue to work towards joining the United Nations?

Question: If the application to join the United Nations doesn't succeed in September,
do you believe that Taiwan must continue working to join the United Nations?

Somewhat Strongly
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree No opinion Total
Disagree disagree
49.0% 19.1% 8.2% 10.9% 12.9% 100%
Total 'Agree': 68.1% Total 'Disagree': 23.8%