It has recently been suggested that Taiwan should sign a “peace agreement” with China in the belief it will help reduce tensions in the Taiwan Strait. In general, the term “peace agreement” refers to anything aimed at bringing an end to a bloody conflict such as an armistice signed by warring states, a ceasefire agreement between two sides in a civil war or methods to resolve a border dispute with a neighboring nation. Not one of the 192 member nations of the UN has signed any form of “peace agreement” with Taiwan and yet still somehow manage to peacefully coexist with Taiwan. The one exception is of course China.
Nobody believes that the problems between Taiwan and China are the result of Taiwan encroaching on China. The Taiwanese government gave up on its ridiculous national policy of “reconquering the Mainland” long ago and officially abrogated the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of National Mobilization for Suppression of the Communist Rebellion (動員戡亂時期臨時條款) in 1991. Since then, Taiwan has demonstrated goodwill toward China by conducting business and investing large amounts of money in the country, so much so that it sometimes comes across as trying to curry favor with China.
In other words, the tensions in the Taiwan Strait are a direct result of the threat China poses to Taiwan, a nation over which it has never held sovereignty. At present, China has more than 1,000 missiles pointing at Taiwan, a number that continues to increase. China has even promulgated an “Anti-Secession” Law that is nothing more than a blatant attempt to legitimize its claims to sovereignty over Taiwan and a legal fig-leaf for widespread efforts to exclude Taiwan from the international arena.
In the event of a kidnapping, the situation is resolved when the kidnapper releases the victim unconditionally, there is no question of both sides negotiating or signing an agreement. If the kidnapper insists on “negotiating,” he or she does so to extort a ransom and the victim is expected to pay a price for freedom. This is a perfect metaphor for the nature of cross-strait relations, with China threatening Taiwan. In truth, all that is required to secure lasting peace in the Taiwan Strait is for China to renounce the use of military force against Taiwan. There is no need for China to keep pretending that “peace talks” are necessary.
China supports “peace talks” because these are the perfect way to force Taiwan to pay a price — whether belittling its nationhood or forcing it to concede sovereignty.
What Taiwan should do is openly call China on its misdeeds in front of the international community. It is important to stand up and explain how China breaches the principles of freedom, democracy, self determination and human rights and the extent to which it acts in ways that run counter to the UN Charter and the norms of international law.
The government must demand that China behave like a modern and civilized nation and respect the sovereignty of Taiwanese. To recklessly enter into “peace talks” with China would be to walk into a trap.
We must never forget that in 1951, Tibet signed a “peace agreement” with Beijing that is similar in form to “one country, two systems.” Within a decade, the People’s Liberation Army had occupied the country and butchered countless people. Since then China has moved huge numbers of Han Chinese into Tibet, so that Tibetans are now a minority in their own country. Tibet’s tragic fate at the hands of China is something that Taiwanese cannot afford to forget.
Peng Ming-min is a former presidential adviser.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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