An interesting thing has come about. In 2000, Beijing announced in a white paper entitled One China Principle and the Taiwan Question that the Republic of China (ROC) had already been replaced by the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. Since, in Beijing's understanding, the ROC no longer exists, why would it choose to resort to force rather than allow Taiwan to "negate" the existence of the ROC?
Beijing considers the ROC to be a remnant of the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and thus the cause for "re-unification" with Taiwan is a sacred mission for all Chinese. Once Taiwan is "liberated," the ROC will be history.
Beijing's intention in enacting an "anti-secession" law is simply to cover up its inability to "liberate" and "re-unify" Taiwan. However, so long as Taiwan continues to retain the name "ROC," the old framework of the civil war between the CCP and the KMT remains in place.
Following the transition of power in 2000, Taiwan absolutely had an opportunity to reverse this historical process and distance itself further from China to resolve what China calls the continuation of the civil war. After the KMT's defeat in the presidential elections in 2000 and last year, the antagonistic situation between the KMT and the CCP no longer exists. What remains is this phoney name: the ROC. Therefore, the ultimate goal of Taiwan's democratization is very obvious.
To deliver a goodwill gesture to the People First Party (PFP), President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) announced in a summit with PFP leader James Soong (宋楚瑜) last week that the ROC is the common denominator for both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Politically, the announcement recognized that the civil war between the KMT and the CCP has yet to end.
In addition, Chen did not say if he was forced into making this announcement because the opposition parties hold a legislative majority or because he was under pressure from the US. The moment the 10-point agreement reached between Chen and Soong was released, it provoked a backlash within both the green and blue camps. The agreement has shown how terrifying it is to have the "ROC" as a national title.
First, KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
What the Chen-Soong summit has generated is legitimacy for "re-unification" with China. I predict that more confrontation and polarization will occur if this trend facilitates reconciliation between the DPP and the PFP.
Nonetheless, the biggest threat is posed not by the pan-blue camp, but by Beijing. The details of China's proposed anti-secession law have yet to be released, nor have they been discussed. This has forced the DPP to return to the meaningless talk of civil war.
However, Beijing will not be satisfied with simply the continuation of the civil war between the KMT and the CCP. Rather, it would like to end the civil war. No wonder Beijing has arbitrarily and unilaterally confirmed that the "one China" principle is based on the 1992 consensus. Let us mull over chairman Mao Zedong's (毛澤東) sarcastic logic: if peace is our sole end, we can achieve that simple peace at any time by surrendering ourselves.
Is the 10-point agreement the beginning of reconciliation or upheaval? Let us wait and see.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS