Last Friday's speech by the fourth-ranked Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader, Jia Qinglin (賈慶林), clearly demonstrates that China still does not understand Taiwan. Although it was a major statement commemorating the 10th anniversary of former Chinese president Jiang Zemin's (江澤民) so-called Eight Points, the speech said little that was new. Other than giving a few hints about China's proposed anti-secession law, the speech uses racist argumentation and falsehoods to make its case.
Jia begins by noting how Jiang reiterated the policies of "peaceful unification" and "one country, two systems" -- policies which came from Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平). According to Jia, everything was fine until the mid-1990s when Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) pushed the "separatist activities" of creating "two Chinas" and "one China, one Taiwan."
Jia said that Jiang's eight points "supported the principle of one China, the foundation and prerequisite for achieving peaceful unification."
But the speech did not recognize that such a prerequisite would end negotiations before they began. This renders meaningless the subsequent statement that "under the prerequisite of one China, we can discuss any topic."
Perhaps the most disappointing feature of Jia's speech is its use of racist argumentation. He claims that Taiwanese are Chinese because of their "bones and flesh" and states, "the 21st century is the century of the Chinese people achieving a great renaissance," a "great renaissance that is the joint desire of all Chinese sons and daughters."
Such racist language goes back to Sun Yat-sen's (
The one new point in Jia's speech is his short discussion of the proposed "Anti-Secession National Law" (反分裂國家法). He says, "This law will codify as law the policies which our party and government have implemented for more than 20 years to achieve a peaceful solution to the Taiwan question using the basic policies of peaceful unification and `one country, two systems' and the Eight Points."
According to Jia, "This law will also make clear that all the Chinese people will defend the nation's sovereignty and its territorial integrity, and that they absolutely will not accept `Taiwan independence' separatist forces using any name or any method to separate Taiwan from China."
Jia says that in the early 1990s, Taiwan accepted the "1992 consensus" in which both sides agreed to "one China, with each side making its own interpretation." Originally, China denied that such a 1992 consensus existed, only saying in late 2001 that such a consensus had been agreed to, during Taiwan's legislative elections when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) said as much. At that time, Su Chi (蘇起), a former KMT official who later served as vice-chairman and chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), maintained that such a consensus existed, but people in the MAC looked for evidence and found none.
Finally, Jia argues that we "advocate the new path of developing relations across the straits with Taiwan's political parties, groups and representative personages to seek discussions and the resolution of problems."
In China, the CCP controls government and groups as well as "personages," but Taiwan is now a democracy and must be represented by its government. Jia, like his predecessors in enunciating Chinese policy, fails to understand this change. Rather, he says Taiwan identity, democracy and reform are simply banners of the "`Taiwan Independence' separatist forces" who wish to use all their energies to push "desinification," "cultural Taiwan independence" and "rectification of Taiwan's name."
Charter flights across the Taiwan Strait during the Lunar New Year are great for Taiwanese businessmen and their families, but China cannot hope for genuine progress in cross-strait relations until it significantly increases its understanding of Taiwan and changes its policies accordingly. What initial steps could China take to improve its relations with Taiwan without giving too much away?
First, even without changing its rhetoric, as a measure to promote mutual confidence, China could reduce the number of missiles pointed at Taiwan. Second, China could attempt to demonstrate the bona fides of its "one country, two systems" policy by genuinely giving Hong Kong more autonomy. Third, China could agree to more practical cross-strait measures such as taking back its citizens that are currently in Taiwan's jails for illegal entry.
Bruce Jacobs is a professor of Asian languages and studies at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.
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