The "one China" policy is a tool that is being used to suppress Taiwan's aspirations for formal sovereignty, as well as its democracy. Unfortunately, the US government has often "assisted" at the most inopportune times.
For instance, late last year, the Taiwanese people were wary enough to install a pro-China pan-blue majority in the Legislative Yuan -- a result for which the US government's untimely anti-sovereignty remarks were at least partially responsible. Now, the US wants these pro-China legislators to let the China-deterring arms procurement bill pass -- an irony only Beijing would appreciate. However, for the US, this might be the first taste of how the "one China" policy can come in conflict with US strategic interests.
To be sure, the arms bill could still be passed eventually, but not on account of US pressure. Rather, it would be the pan-blue camp's utmost desire to regain control of the government so it could compel legislators to try to mollify Taiwanese voters.
As a pre-presidential election strategy, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) will try to delude the public into believing that it cares about Taiwan's security. The KMT leadership is fully aware that the process of arms purchase takes years and will be controlled by the government that takes power in 2008.
The procurement plan could then be "revised" and the pan-blue camp's "grand" scheme of disarming Taiwan would proceed unmolested, if the KMT were to regain power. That's why the bill is destined to drag on as close to the presidential election as possible.
The public can expect to be fed a stream of lame excuses by the KMT in the coming months.
It's essential to understand that Taiwan's unilateral disarmament is the pan-blue camp leaders' "oath of loyalty" to join up with Beijing.
Meanwhile, these leaders in concert with Taiwan's pro-China media have been preaching to the people the impossibility of Taiwan's independence. Invariably they use the US' "one China" policy to back up their claims. At the same time, they are relentlessly planting the seeds of inevitability for "unification" instead.
Up until recently, positive factors, such as Taiwanese consciousness and identity, and the desirability of democracy and liberty, have dwarfed all of the negative ones. In fact, opinion polls showing how overwhelmingly the Taiwanese people are against "unification" -- have often been cited as evidence of the impossibility of Taiwan ever succumbing to China.
But, pan-blue camp leaders' incessant exploitation of the US' "one China" policy -- which reached a crescendo when former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
In other words, while Taiwan should be on high alert to guard against "unification by stealth," the Taiwanese people might be dangerously close to their most apathetic. Should the collaboration of pan-blue camp leaders with Beijing succeed in bringing about a takeover by stealth of Taiwan by China, the US' "one China" policy would have at least contributed in terms of creating an amicable environment. In light of this, the US government's standard practice of "hands off Taiwan-China discussions, as well as resolution of Taiwan's status as long as no violence is involved" appears to be unrealistic and deserves a thorough review.
Unfortunately, the "one China" policy also tends to discourage the US from educating its own people -- both government officials and the public alike -- ? to the fact that Taiwan is too important to the US to allow it to become part of China.
Therefore, the key to warding off the looming "unification by stealth" calamity -- as well as helping relieve the ongoing difficulties regarding arms purchases -- might be the US' open acknowledgement of Taiwan's long-term, vital strategic value. It would surprise few people if the US government then proceeded to recognize the need for changing or at least tweaking the "one China" policy. This could be done to safeguard against any form of "unification by stealth." Perhaps the US would also commit to formally recognizing the sovereign state of Taiwan in case of a Chinese attack, or in case a "unification" without the consent of the Taiwanese people is deemed unavoidable without this recognition.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
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