A new Taiwanese constitution was tabled for consideration recently, and Taiwan’s China Post has trouble with the preamble:
…the professors wrote into their draft constitution Taiwan and
China are two different countries and the people in the former have the final
say in their country’s future. Any change to the political relationship between
the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China must be decided by
negotiations between the two sides and subject to approval of the people of
Taiwan, they added.Do they have to state in the constitution the universally acknowledged
inalienable right of the people to determine the future of their country?
How can a paper call something a "universally acknowledged right" if it doesn’t recognize that right itself? The China Post has specifically rejected calls for referendums should a future Taiwanese president sign a sovereignty-related treaty with Communist China. In one of his columns not long ago, Dr. Joe Hung derided as "naive" those who would call for a referendum in such a case, quoting the current constitution, which says that that power belongs ONLY to Taiwan’s political class, and NOT the people.
What the paper really objects to then, is taking the power of surrender away from a future KMT capitulationist.