After official talks between Taiwan and China were frozen for a decade, Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林) finally agreed to visit Taiwan. Given the problems that have occurred during the last 20 years of interaction between Taiwan and China, the two sides have to make the most of this historic opportunity to begin a dialogue and agree on a legal framework that will assure peace across the Taiwan Strait.
China has constantly insisted that Taiwan accept the “one China” principle when discussing the resumption of talks between ARATS and the Straits Exchange Foundation. This was a condition that the Democratic Progressive Party refused during its time in office, forcing Beijing to face the fact that Taiwan has a different opinion regarding the “one China” principle. This refusal eventually led to China’s willingness to accept the so-called “1992 consensus” as proposed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), with Beijing eventually replacing its “one China” principle with the “consensus.”
While Beijing might try to twist the “consensus” into the “one China principle,” the KMT interprets the “consensus” as meaning that there is “one China, with each side having its own interpretation.”
When the “consensus” replaced the “one China” principle, Beijing started to tone down its talk about “one China.” This showed that Beijing was no longer willing to go head-to-head with Taiwan on the meaning of the “one China” principle and that it would rather use its political clout in the international arena and its status as the only legal representative of China at the UN to encourage the misconception within the international community that Taiwan has accepted that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the one and only China.
Given the international disadvantage it faces, if Taiwan fails to make it clear to the world that the Republic of China (ROC) is a sovereign and independent nation based on law when Chen visits Taipei as China’s official emissary, we will be basically giving in to Beijing and saying that China has sovereign rights over Taiwan. The Taiwan Strait would become a part of China’s waters and the international community will not be able to intervene in any disputes that may occur in the Strait, which would place Taiwan in a dangerous position.
Therefore, the government and the public must express their common belief in Taiwan’s sovereign and independent status to maintain Taiwan’s national security, democracy and freedom, and ensure the peaceful development of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
This also represents a pledge on behalf of Taiwan and its people to the encouragement and development of democracy in China. We have to make this pledge to ourselves and to the rest of the world, especially Chinese people around the globe, when Chen visits Taipei.
If China is really sincere about coexisting peacefully with Taiwan and does not wish to see any further spread of what they refer to as “Taiwanese separatism,” it must try to understand the anger Taiwanese have held toward China for so long.
Beijing must also realize that Taiwan is a sovereign nation, equal to it in status, and it must also show due respect and courtesy to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) as president of the ROC.
After all, Ma and Taiwanese are citizens of the ROC, not rebels and traitors to the CCP. Therefore, it is extremely disrespectful for China to demand that Taiwan’s government remove our flag from venues the Chinese officials will visit or to demand that the government ban or suppress any protests or rallies during their visit.
Taiwanese also need to understand that the goal behind us objecting to Chen’s visit is to announce to the world that we have basic human rights that entitle us to decide our own future. The public must also understand that Chen’s visit does not represent an opportunity for us to utilize the strength of numbers to vent our anger at him, his delegation or China.
Regardless of what ARATS Vice Chairman Zhang Lizhong (鄭立中), Chen or the CCP does, apart from taking substantial action to show our determination to decide Taiwan’s future, we must show every guest in Taiwan respect, including official Chinese emissaries who have been invited here by our government.
Taiwanese must clearly understand that these rallies are aimed at the CCP and the KMT and not the Chinese. Therefore, attendees of these rallies should remember that they cannot lose their temper and insult the people of China.
The biggest differences between Taiwan and China are their political systems and the values of their people. These differences have nothing to do with the beauty or ugliness of human nature or the superiority or inferiority of different cultures.
We have to guard against politicians using malicious instigations to cover up their own incompetence and those who try to turn cross-strait conflicts into conflicts involving nationalism, for this will only harbor greater hate within the hearts of our people that will last for many generations. This is not the way to peace.
Although Taiwan is small, we need to have big hopes and aspirations and cannot allow ourselves to be pulled down by anyone.
Tseng Chien-yuan is an assistant professor of public administration at Chung Hua University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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