DPP and independence

One issue which seems to be getting some airtime recently is whether the DPP should “drop its policy on independence”. For example, this story in the Taipei Times about the continued flirtation of the PFP by the DPP:

[quote]But Soong also hinted that a condition for talks and possible cross-party cooperation would be an adjustment to the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) independence platform.

“I hope that the PFP can break the ice between the ruling and opposition parties over cross-strait relations. However, for this to happen, I need a tool to break the ice. We hope that the DPP can adjust its platform on Taiwanese independence to give us that tool,” Soong said.[/quote]
So, 2 questions:

  1. What is the DPP’s policy on independence?
  2. What should be their policy?

My understanding of the current position (as stated by Chen Shui Bian) is that the ROC is a sovereign independent country, and that “Taiwan is the ROC, and the ROC is Taiwan”. There’s no plan to formally declare independence, to officially change the boundaries of the ROC, and no commitment to a new constitution (all of which are, I believe, supported by the TSU).

On the ‘One China’ policy, they do not accept it as a precondition to talks, but are willing for it to be an item of discussion.

All of the above is from comments by CSB (as opposed to any formal policy statement of the DPP), so maybe it’s his personal view and not that of his party. Have I missed anything/misrepresented anything?

I believe the official position is stated in the Party Platform Item 1:

"Our fundamental positions:

  1. Establisment of an independent Republic of Taiwan…"

Does anyone know where we can find an official English translation?

Maybe someone can clarify this, but I seem to remember about 2 or 3 years ago, the DPP declared something like ‘policy introduced by the President has priority over party platfirm’. I’m not sure that I have that right, but I think the gist of it was that Chen’s ‘three noes’ overrode the party platofrm on independence.

Can someone who remembers better than I clear that up?


The President’s policy is that Taiwan is already independent, which it is. The only thing that needs to be done it to make the world know that we are officially independent. Because our party is in a position of power, we can now pressure the PFP into adopting a more pro-Taiwan policy over their Chinese nationalism.

If Taiwan is already independent, why would you need to officially declare it independent.

Sounds like the DPP does love Taiwan enough. If one already loves Taiwan, there is no need to officially declare one’s love for Taiwan.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]If Taiwan is already independent, why would you need to officially declare it independent.

Sounds like the DPP does love Taiwan enough. If one already loves Taiwan, there is no need to officially declare one’s love for Taiwan.[/quote]
AC you are absolutely right, Taiwan is already independent from CHINA and of course does not need to declare independence.

However, Taiwan needs to declare independence from the 50 years of colonization by the China Nationalist Party (KMT). The KMT invaded Taiwan and brought a foreign constition. Taiwan needs to declare its independence from the KMT and release the shackles of Republic of China. The Taiwan civil war between the people of this nation and the foreign KMT invaders is not complete yet. Taiwan’s people must win the legislature and maintain the Executive branch so that it can declare itself independent from the KMT’s legacy.

Finally, David, I think this might be what all of the fuss is about. The DPP plans on changing KMT legacy items, such as the Made in China constitution, the China references in the anthem and the KMT reference in the flag. That is not declaring independence from China, that is cleaning up the mess of the KMT.

If CSB is really sincere about his beliefs, then he should have the balls to quit tip-toeing around the issue saying crap like “Taiwan is already an independent, sovereign nation” and “Taiwan is the ROC, the ROC is Taiwan,” and just declare outright independence. I’d have much more respect for him if he did that rather than playing word games. He’ll just have to be prepared to deal with the consequences.

A reminder: This thread is about the DPP’s independence policy. Any discussions about independence in general, or willingness tostand up and fight (which were split from this thread) should be had in appropriate existing or new threads.


Even so, Chen’s promises only address what he will do during his presidency - so they don’t completely contradict the main DPP platform of an independent ROT. Equally, comments by Chen ‘defending’ the ROC and claiming that it is the same as Taiwan hardly constitute policy, so I can’t see how they would invalidate the official DPP position.

Well, this gets to the core of the issue - is this really the DPP policy? It is certainly what I understand by a formal declaration of independence: announcing that the ROC is no more (on Taiwan), and that a completely new entity (the ROT) has been formed. However this is, to be polite about it, a controversial position - and one more often associated with the TSU than the DPP nowadays.

I don’t understand this sentiment - you sound like a rabid TSU supporter, which I’m pretty sure you’re not. Why would you respect someone who deliberately did something that would almost certainly start an unwinable war (for little or no actual benefit) more than someone who tries to balance his beliefs with the need to not antagonise China too much?

It seems to me that CSB is not just playing word games - he is actually advocating a change of position for the DPP: before he became president, there was a clear position of ‘revolution’ (the position described by Hobart above), while now it seems more of an ‘evolution’ - the ROC has developed to a point where it does represent the people under its control, and so there is no need to replace it.

Ironically, when this “revolution / evolution” of DPP position occured. CSB had less than 40% of the people of Taiwan supported him.

I believe these changes only reflect the reality of how much room really exist on the Strait Issue.

Maybe so - but now he’s got over 50%, as opposed to the less than 50% Lien and Soong combined were able to rustle up.

That I believe is debatable and was shown that empirically neither side got a majority; but a plurality. Since there were a significant number of invalid votes.

The presidental election and LY election were a wake up call for the pan-Green, since they realize the more radical the platform, the less support they would garner. The ethnic exclusion and sympathy platform is not universal on Taiwan yet. Which is also a cause for the recent push in moderating their position towards the middle ground and catering to the sensibility of status quo supporters at large.

Let’s see… two tickets running, one got more than the other… looks mighty like a majority to me.

The only party that got a real wake up call were the radical PFP. The pan greens increased once again in seats and overall % of vote.