Why is Taiwan's relationship with China so intractable an issue? Why, when they share common economic interests -- 1 million Taiwanese live in China, working in some 50,000 firms in which Taiwanese have invested over US$400 billion -- does China aim 500 short-range missiles at Taiwan?
The run-up to the presidential election tomorrow is one current source of tension. President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has initiated a referendum process that might someday be used to ask Taiwanese if they want to formalize today's de facto independence. This infuriates China.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
After all, as Mao Zedong (
China's new leadership often evinces a new judiciousness and moderation in its diplomacy. But Luo Yuan (羅援), a senior colonel at the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences, recently declared that if Taiwan's leaders "refuse to come to their senses and continue to use referendums as an excuse to seek independence, they will push [their] compatriots into the abyss of war."
In an age when national self-determination is a hallowed principle, how is it possible that Taiwan -- which has been part of China during only four of the last eleven decades, and has never been under the control of the PRC -- is shun-ned by every nation when it deigns to wonder aloud why it should not be allowed to go its own way?
The reasons have deep historical roots. When Mao and the Chinese Communists came to power in 1949, they promised "reunification of the Motherland," which included bringing Xinjiang (the Muslim desert regions of the West), Tibet, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan back under central government control. It became a matter of national pride for a country that had been guafen (
reunification as a "sacred" duty.
As Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau returned "to the embrace
of the Motherland," Mao's commitment seemed close to realization. The fact that only Taiwan stands in the way makes unification all the more non-negotiable.
But, there is another dynamic at work. Over the last two decades, almost every other plank of the Communist Party's platform -- world-wide people's war, proletarian struggle leading to a classless utopia, a triumph over global capitalism, etc. -- has been abandoned. This leaves unification as the last tie to Mao's revolution and justification for one-party rule. China's leadership plays up this "revolutionary" commitment, for it helps generate nationalist sentiment, one of the few things -- besides strong economic performance -- that legitimizes the Communist monopoly on power.
China's leaders ought to reflect on the fact that their country is no longer the "sick man of Asia." It is increasingly powerful, globally proactive and economically robust. So it is a timely moment to reappraise its position and to begin acting from strength, not weakness. In short, it is time for China's leaders to change the chemistry of their long feud with Taiwan.
After all, China and Taiwan have struggled politically even as their economies become increasingly unified. In due course, they may well be able to become more unified on the political front -- if they do not push their disagreements too aggressively. For economic convergence, if allowed to ripen, could set Taiwan and the PRC on an evolutionary course toward common sovereignty.
How can such a scenario be realized? China must declare, loudly and clearly, that greater democracy, not mutant Leninism, is its ultimate political goal, and that as this evolutionary process takes place and the political climate becomes more congenial, they look forward to discussing how to better weave a political, as well as an economic, fabric with Taiwan. Such a declaration alone would give Taiwanese the ability to imagine that they may one day find it in their interest to be part of China.
For its part, Taiwan needs to calm down. Its leaders must understand that, even though "independence" may sometimes seem like a logical scenario, Taiwan is a small, vulnerable island, and China an emerging superpower. Even though Taiwan may have a "right" to independence, its leaders need to remind their people that provocative actions will gain them little.
In 1973, as Sino-US relations were thawing, Mao admitted to Henry Kissinger that, though he did not believe reunification would come peacefully, "We can do without Taiwan for the time being, and let it come after 100 years ... Why is there a need to be in such great haste?"
Mao's advice is not bad. China must take to heart its newfound dynamism and strength, and write a new scenario for its relations with Taiwan that emphasizes persuasion instead of missiles. For the first time in 50 years, China and Taiwan share real interests. What blocks matrimony is China's lack of democracy. Most Chinese would probably like to see this absence remedied as much as they favor full reunification. Only democracy in China can bring lasting peace to the Taiwan Strait.
Orville Schell is a historian of China and dean at the University of California at Berkeley. Copyright: Project Syndicate
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS