The Recent suggestion by President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) that the time has come to seriously consider scrapping the National Unification Council and the Guidelines for National Unification has resulted in a fierce struggle between the two ends of the political spectrum.
Should the council and the guidelines be abolished? Yes, of course. The reason for this is that both the council and the guidelines aim to achieve a purpose -- eventual cross-strait "unification" -- that does not enjoy the support of the general public. Only those who favor unification with China would support retaining the council and the guidelines.
The purpose of this article is to warn the public of the danger posed by the Guidelines for National Unification, and to alert them to the existence of a second, "economic version" of these guidelines, which also needs to be abolished.
On Oct. 20, 2001, the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) National Congress passed a resolution on reorienting Taiwan's economic development. This incorporated the Economic Development Advisory Committee's (EDAC) "active opening, effective management" proposal.
This resolution has effectively become the DPP's party platform, and the government's administrative guidelines.
Although it does not specify issues of cross-strait economic integration, coexistence, or even future cross-strait unification, the content of the resolution more or less conforms with China's grand strategy of "promoting unification through economics."
As such, this policy effectively contributes to China's economic success -- at Taiwan's expense.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
When Chen put forward the revised "active management, effective opening" proposal in his New Year address, questions were raised as to whether this violated the guidelines.
But, in fact, the council and the guidelines are products of the then KMT government's one-party state, and do not serve the needs of the public. That Ma tried to use these illegitimate fabrications to defend his party's stance on cross-strait relations should serve to inspire all who love Taiwan to seek the immediate abolishment of the Guidelines for National Unification.
By the same token, the 2001 EDAC resolution was a collaborative "masterpiece" drawn up by pro-unification activists, scholars, government officials and China-based Taiwanese businesspeople. Its "consensus" was reached by a tiny percentage of Taiwan's population of 23 million. Therefore, this resolution should not be regarded as a party platform or even a national policy.
The policy of "active opening" has done great damage to Taiwan's economy. In excess of 40 percent of Taiwan's manufacturing now takes place abroad, mainly in China. In the manufacture of information technology products, the figure is 73.6 percent, and 100 percent for notebook computers.
Ninety percent of Taiwan's foreign investments are now in China. This has, in turn, hurt business in Taiwan's major commercial ports. Exports have fallen, damaging Taiwan's position as a transshipment hub. As a result, China's high-technology output is now the world's second largest. And no other nation is more dependent on China than Taiwan.
But the greatest damage has been caused by the legitimization of a course of action that is tantamount to financing our enemies. The policy of "active opening" creates the false impression that China is a benefactor, rather than an enemy, so that when former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) "joined hands with China against Taiwan," the public response was one of apathy.
The policy was also responsible for the rout of the pan-green camp in the three-in-one local elections last December.
It is at the very heart of China's strategy to "promote unification through economics" and to "apply political pressure through commerce." As long as Taiwan persists with this flawed policy, the pro-China lobby will grow stronger and, ultimately, China will swallow this country whole.
Realizing the danger of the policy of "active opening," Chen has proposed "active management" as the country's new direction.
He must be allowed to take the next logical step and abolish the National Unification Council and the Guidelines for National Unification.
Otherwise, these anachronisms will lead Taiwan down the treacherous path to "unification" with China.
Huang Tien-lin is a national policy adviser to the president.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS