In an interview with the Singaporean daily the Straits Times a few days ago, Li Jiaquan (李家泉), former head of the Taiwan Research Institute at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, revealed that Beijing may accept as fact that Taiwan is an individual entity. In other words, Beijing would accept as fact that Taiwan is the Republic of China. After the interview was published, however, Li rushed to deny it, saying that not a single word in the article had come from him.
Such a flat denial makes it clear that political factors are at work, and that it is not a matter of "misunderstanding" by the reporter. This shows that Beijing is trying a new way of thinking about solving problems in the cross-strait relationship. Maybe this new thinking is not yet mature, maybe it is already complete, but more probably, Beijing still hasn't decided when -- ie, the most opportune time for Beijing -- to announce this new thinking.
Five years ago, when the chairman of China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, Wang Daohan (
China's main reason for denying these reports is that it does not want its bottom line to become public knowledge and use it as a bargaining chip during negotiations. Giving things away too early means not holding the upper hand in negotiations. Thus, when Li denied his statements, he wasn't denying the existence of the new thinking. Rather, it meant the announcement came at the wrong time and was made by the wrong person.
In the current situation, the PRC is doing all it can to protect the ROC. This is a funny situation because the PRC has always believed that the ROC ceased to exist a long time ago. The white paper "The One China-Principle and the Taiwan Issue" issued in February 2000 by China's Taiwan Affairs Office stated that, "On October 1, 1949, the Central People's Government of the PRC was proclaimed, replacing the government of the Republic of China to become the only legal government of the whole of China and its sole legal representative in the international arena, thereby bringing the historical status of the Republic of China to an end."
But now China hopes that the Republic of China will maintain its national title -- ie, perpetuate its historical status. The determination to maintain the ROC is as strong as the determination to terminate it.
On Nov. 19 last year, the director of research at China's Academy of Military Sciences, Luo Yuan (
Isn't it the same thing as selling out the country when even PRC generals want the ROC to include the PRC?
When Li denied his statements, he also said that "the ROC includes China, and we are happy to let you include it," and he also said that "although an ROC that maintains the status quo by not changing national flag, national anthem, national title and national territory in a future constitutional amendment by [President] Chen Shui-bian (
The actual situation is a little bit of refusal of the ROC, a little bit of acceptance. For example, the PRC doesn't only accept the ROC on the ROC currency, it welcomes it. If it didn't, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) wouldn't have received Taiwanese businessmen last year, nor would he have visited Taiwanese businesses when he recently went on an inspection tour of Kunshan.
The information revealed by Li means that though the PRC in the past never recognized "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan," the "two China" principle is now loosening up. This is something that Taiwan has to recognize, Whether the "one China, one Taiwan" principle will loosen up depends on the efforts of Taiwan, the attitudes of the US and pressure from the international community. Taiwan's efforts have already had an effect -- China did not want to accept the ROC's Guidelines for National Unification in 1991, but following Taiwan's power transfer in 2000, they regretted not having done so.
China also refused to accept the "one China, with each side having its own interpretation" model in 1992, but now they are only too anxious for Taiwan to accept it. This is evidence that the PRC is a rogue nation that bullies the weak and fears the strong. Taiwan must not provoke China, but if it persists in the principle of sovereignty and moves toward the international community, it will not only be rock steady, it will also continue to develop.
Paul Lin is a commentator based in New York.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS