分享

Taiwan's Right to Freedom

謝院長投書華盛頓郵報:「台灣有自由的權利」全文
By Frank Chang-ting Hsieh
Friday, March 25, 2005; Page A19
Tomorrow, hundreds of thousands of Taiwanese will take to the streets in
our
country to peacefully express their opposition to China's most recent
threat
to the freedom of Taiwan. This month the National People's Congress passed
a
so-called "Anti-Secession Law" that threatens the use of military force
against our country. The demonstrators will mobilize to oppose the idea
that
China has a "right" to use force to subjugate the people of Taiwan -- and
they will protest the notion that some 2,900 unelected and unaccountable
Chinese "parliamentarians" have the right to determine the future of the
23
million people of Taiwan.
The escalation in China's campaign of intimidation is especially
perplexing
because it comes after a period of improvement in cross-strait relations.
For
example, direct charter flights between Taiwan and China have been resumed
after a long hiatus. Indeed, for the past five years my government has
been
offering one olive branch after another to Beijing.
Moreover, our president, Chen Shui-bian, has taken the position since his
first inauguration, in 2000, that "it is time for the two sides to
relinquish
hostility and confrontation left over from the old days."
Since 2000 the government of Taiwan has offered on more than 200 occasions
to
resume cross-strait talks. We recognize that people on both sides of the
Taiwan Strait share a common ancestral, cultural and historical heritage.
Taiwan has sought to further promote cultural, economic and trade
exchanges.
We have offered to establish a code of conduct, buffer zones and military
consultation procedures modeled on mechanisms that have helped minimize
the
risk of inadvertent or accidental conflict in other areas. And last
November
we proposed that the two sides open a window of opportunity for the
long-term
development, security and prosperity of both our peoples. We have
repeatedly
tried to pave the way for the "three links" of direct transportation,
communication and trade.
China's response has been negative. It has refused to resume talks on a
wide
range of important issues. And now it has enacted a law that authorizes
the
use of military force against Taiwan.
The process by which this law was passed demonstrates the great
differences
between the political systems of China and Taiwan. China first announced
its
intention to pass such a law in 2004. The text was kept secret for months
and
revealed just before it was passed unanimously by a parliament that has no
real authority other than that granted to it by the leaders of the
one-party
state.
Contrast that secrecy and central control with the vibrant democracy in
Taiwan. Our democratic system has immeasurably enriched the lives of the
Taiwanese people, while the Chinese people live in a dictatorship with no
political, religious or civic freedoms. Taiwan is committed to the
peaceful
resolution of disputes; China has 700 missiles aimed at our country and
refuses to renounce the use of force. Taiwan is an ally of the United
States
and has actively supported the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative.
China has repeatedly been the subject of sanctions for its weapons
proliferation activities around the world. Taiwan has renounced all
weapons
of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons. China is expanding its
nuclear arsenal and developing new generations of land- and sea-based
ballistic missiles capable of reaching U.S. soil.
China has attempted to justify its anti-secession law by at times claiming
a
parallel to the U.S. Civil War and Lincoln's effort to forcibly preserve
the
Union. But the analogy is fundamentally flawed. Abraham Lincoln strove to
maintain a Union of territories placed under sovereign control of the U.S.
federal government in 1787 by a ratification process that rested on
popular
consent. China's "law" is the product of one-party tyranny conducted by
"parliamentarians" who have never faced election. It refers to a Taiwan
that
has never been a part of, or under the sovereign control of, the People's
Republic of China. And it ignores the most basic point: Lincoln wanted to
preserve the Union in the name of freedom, not to deny it.
Taiwan agrees with the democratic vision of President Bush: Security will
ultimately be guaranteed only through the advance of liberty. And
certainly,
over the past two decades, we have seen remarkable progress in democracy
in
East Asia. In fact, it's no surprise that the most serious security
problems
we face in East Asia come from the policies being adopted by the region's
two
remaining one-party dictatorships: China and North Korea.
For all the efforts to "engage" China and help it become a "responsible"
power, the reality is that it continues to stifle the democratic
aspirations
of its own people and to threaten Taiwan's democracy with military force.
Unless the great democracies of the world say this behavior is not
tolerable,
we will only be inviting Beijing to believe it is.
Taiwan will continue to be open to dialogue with China on how to reduce
tensions. But as tomorrow's rally should make clear, it is the people of
Taiwan who will determine their future, not the unelected leaders in
Beijing.
The writer is premier of the Republic of China (Taiwan).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64569-2005Mar24.html 
明天(週六),百萬台灣民眾將走上街頭,以和平方式抗議中國近日對台灣自由權利所造
成的威脅。中國人代會本月通過一項所謂的「反分裂國家法」,威脅使用武力對付台灣。
台灣民眾將動員示威,反對中國有權使用武力來征服台灣,同時抗議中國2900名非民選且
無需負責的「人大代表」,反對其有權決定台灣2千3百萬民眾的未來。
中國選在兩岸關係已稍見和緩之際,竟加強對台灣恫嚇,尤其令人費解。例如,在長期中
斷後,兩岸甫恢復包機直航。事實上,我國政府在過去5年來不斷地向北京遞出和平的橄
欖枝。 
此外,在2000年陳水扁總統第一任期就職演說中便表示:「該是兩岸拋棄舊時代所遺留下
來的敵意與對立的時候了。」 
自2000年迄今,台灣政府已在200餘個場合提出兩岸復談的建議。我們體認到海峽兩岸具
有共同的血緣、文化及歷史背景。台灣並進一步尋求兩岸在文化、經濟及貿易各方面的交
流。我們建議設立「海峽兩岸行為準則」、和平緩衝區及軍事協商機制,以降低兩岸因誤
判而發生擦槍走火的風險。我方亦於去年11月建議,?了雙方人民的長期發展、安全與繁
榮,兩岸應開啟一扇機會之窗。我方進而一再嘗試?三通(通航、通郵、通商)舖路,然
中國卻給予負面回應,拒絕就兩岸間重要廣泛的議題復談,甚竟透過立法授權武力犯台。 
該法通過的程序亦顯示出兩岸政治體系截然不同。中國在2004年宣佈有意通過該法,條文
內容密而不宣長達數月之久,直到人代會無異議通過前才揭露,而人代會除了被一黨獨大
的領導者授權外,並未擁有實權。 
倘若拿中國秘密及中央集權的政體與台灣活躍的民主體制相較,我們的民主體制無限地的
豐富了台灣人民的生活;反之,中國大陸人民卻生活在沒有政治、宗教及公民自由的專制
體制下。台灣致力於和平解決爭端;中國卻以700枚飛彈瞄準台灣,並拒絕放棄使用武力
。台灣是美國的盟友,並主動支持由美國領導的「防止擴散安全倡議」;而中國卻因不斷
在全球進行武器擴散活動而遭到譴責。台灣放棄發展包括核武在內的大規模毀滅性武器;
中國卻持續擴張核子武力,並發展射程遠及美國本土的新一代地基及海基彈道飛彈。 
中國有時援引林肯總統發動南北戰爭以維護聯邦統一之作法,企圖合理化其制定「反分裂
國家法」之舉措,但是中國此種引喻根本上是大有缺陷的。林肯依據1787年經由多數決批
准的程序,致力維持聯邦政府轄下的領土完整,而「反分裂國家法」是一黨專制下的產物
,是由一個非經選舉選出的「國會」所審議通過,該法所指涉的台灣,從來就不是中華人
民共和國的一部分,也從未受其管轄。中國漠視了一個最重要的基本原則:林肯是以保障
自由的名義確保國家統一,而非否定自由。 
台灣非常認同布希總統推行民主的看法,即唯有透過更進一步的自由,才能獲得最終的安
全。的確,過去20多年來,東亞地區的民主發展有顯著的進步。事實上,東亞現今所面臨
最嚴重的安全問題來自該區域僅存的兩個獨裁政權:中國及北韓。 
儘管國際間努力與中國「交往」,期協助其成為一個「負責任」的政權,然而中國仍舊繼
續扼殺其人民追求民主的渴望,同時不斷以武力威脅台灣。除非全球主要的民主國家能夠
告訴中國,其行為是令人無法容忍的,否則北京將自認為可以為所欲為。 
台灣將持續以開放的態度積極重啟與中國的對話,並努力降低兩岸緊張情勢。326大遊行
的目標將可清楚表達:是台灣人民決定自己的未來,而非北京那批未經選舉程序選出的領
導人。 
http://info.gio.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=24788&ctNode=919 
分類:日記

評論
上一篇
  • 下一篇
  • 更多文章
    載入中... 沒有更多了