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
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS