Pro-Independence and pro-Reunification

One of Mao Zedong's sayings my father used to echo to me is that "revolutionaries have their revolutionary theories while counter-revolutionaries have their theories to the contrary" (革命有革命的理论，反革命有反革命的理论). That is, people develop their own "theories" to achieve their own ends. In the case of Taiwan's Independence from China, the "theories" that are against or for TI serve as one of the best examples of contrasting and conflicting ideas.

People's Interpretation of Taiwan

Pro-I people have many reasons why they do not believe Taiwan is part of China. For example, some of them do not think Taiwan has ever been Chinese. Their argument is that: Manchurians are not Chinese and their ownership of Taiwan under the Qing Dynasty is that of annexation; and Taiwan was a Japanese asset when the Republic of China came into being in 1911. What about today's version of ROC on Taiwan? They think that it's just another foreign (Chinese) regime that won Taiwan as annexed territory from the defeated Japanese Empire in the WWII. They maintain that ROC is merely occupying Taiwan as "trustee on behalf of the Allied Powers." Such ideas represent an argument for a completely mutually exclusive relationship between Taiwan and China [the Mainland]. In this case, one of the targets they take aim at is the same as that of the Mainland: the Republic of China. Beijing, of course, does not recognize the legitimacy of the ROC that PRC thinks was replaced in 1949 when the People's Republic was created. However, one of the strongest arguments of the PRC has for its claim over Taiwan is the legitimacy of the Republic of China's ownership of the island. Indeed, the ROC provides every link that connects Taiwan to the rest of China and the PRC would be very sorry if the pro-I people actually abolish the ROC on the island.

Other pro-I people are not that extreme in that they simply argue that Taiwan is already an independent, sovereign state and its official name is the Republic of China. But, these people do not think it a big deal if Taiwan changes its official name to the Republic of Taiwan as long as the islanders see fit to do so.

However, for pro-R people, Taiwan has always been Chinese though the Netherlands and Japan occupied the island as colony for relatively short periods. According to them, Taiwan was formally incorporated into China as early as the Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279) and later Chinese dynasties exercised control to different extent over the island. In the late days of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), China was defeated in the 1894-1895 Sino-Japanese War and was forced to cede the island to Japan "in perpetuity" through the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. However, later Chinese governments have never recognized the unfair treaty though they did not attempt to reclaim the northern territories lost to Russia through other unfair treaties. When the World War II ended with Japan being defeated and giving up all the territories under the Treaty of Shimonoseki, China was plunged into another disaster: a bloody 1945-49 Civil War between Kuomintang (KMT) and the Communist Party of China (CPC) forces. KMT lost control over the Mainland to the Communists and retreated to Taiwan. So, after a very short and chaotic 1945-49 reunification of the island with the rest of China, Taiwan again started to live under a different flag when the People's Republic was declared by the Communists on the Mainland in 1949. For more than 110 years since China lost the island to Japan in 1895, Taiwan remains isolated from the rest of China except for the short reunification after WWII. This may in part explain the rise of localization and Taiwanization on the island.

Pro-R people thus believe that the cross-Strait reality is just a leftover from the 1945-49 Civil War and much of a result of China's failed efforts to defend its territory against the Netherlands and Japan. They honestly think that Chinese people on both sides of the Strait should eventually reunify in one way or another and, if their hands are forced, they will reluctantly consider war as an end-all approach to reunification.

Is Taiwan part of China?

The answer to this question is of course yes, though pro-I people invoke "national self-determination" and "democracy" as reasons why Taiwanese people have a right to decide their own fate and why Taiwan should not be part of China. They maintain that Taiwan can choose independence despite of China's "essentially worthless historical claim" to Taiwan and a democratic, prosperous Taiwan should not be part of Communist China.

However, these reasons for the justification of Taiwan's independence from China are dubious at best. Taiwan has never been a nation or a country and, of course, the principle of national self-determination does not apply to the island. The principle was originally established to set African and Asian nations free from their Western colonizers. However, Taiwan is historically an integral part of China, rather than a Chinese colony in its modern sense, to which the principle might apply. To both pro-I and pro-R people, historical claims are not "essentially worthless" since they all invoke their own interpretations of the history on which to base their arguments.

"Democracy" is a better way of government than non-democracy. But, even if Taiwan is a democracy, it does not automatically justify the island's independence from China. For that matter, if the Taiwan-make government is of democracy in its true sense, people will have to redefine what on earth "democracy" is. For example, on the island, the corrupt, shameless and manipulative Chen Shui-bian succeeds in a series of Cultural Revolution-like struggles to stay on top of the Taiwan authorities though a large number of Taiwanese voters voice clearly their intent to "dispose" him.

"Democracy" and "independence" are two different things which do not automatically justify each other and should not be confused with each other. If "democracy" is a justifiable reason for Taiwan's independence, then many others can pass for good ones, for example, the Mainland's lack of an effective social security network for its residents, which denotes a larger picture in which the Mainlanders, on average, live a poorer life than the islanders on Taiwan.

Taiwan is indeed part of China, as historical records and present-day legal reality show, though the island has not yet been reunified with the rest of China. China's ownership of Taiwan dates back to several centuries ago. The island has remained under effective Chinese sovereign control except for relatively short periods of Dutch control and Japanese occupation under an unfair treaty. However, on December 9, 1941, the government of the Republic of China declared war on Japan and made an announcement that nullified all previous treaties with Japan, including the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki. This means that Taiwan has always been Chinese though it was occupied by the Japanese from 1895 to 1945. The Japanese gave up the island back to China after Japan was defeated in the WWII.

As shown by the Constitutions of the Republic of China under which the politics runs on the island and that of the People's Republic of China, Taiwan is not a separate identity outside of China (ROC or PRC).

Except for 24 tiny states that maintain diplomatic relationships with ROC, a regime that has constitutional claims to the whole of China, no governments of the countries around the world challenge China's claim to Taiwan and all of them respect China's "One-China" policy.

All the world standard-setting organizations treat Taiwan as part of China. For example, according to the U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2758, the People's Republic of China replaced the Republic of China to occupy the China seat and be the solely legitimate government representing China at the U.N. Also, no international organizations include Taiwan if their constitutions require its members to be countries.

Independence or reunification?

After historical and legal facts were laid down, the Taiwan issue boils down to China's willingness and capabilities to keep Taiwan within its territory. In its Anti-Secession Law, China clearly expressed its determination to crush any movements that lead to Taiwan's independence from China.

In the event of a war for China's reunification, the true enemies of the Chinese will be the U.S., Japan and possibly their allies instead of the pro-I islanders, who are no enemy of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) at all. The reason is simple. A reunified China will not be in the interest of the U.S., which, with the assistance of Japan and other allies, pursues supremacy over the rest of the world and sees China as a strategic competitor in East Asia. The U.S. and Japanese factors contributing to the movements of Taiwan's independence will play a key role in the reunification process, since pro-I people on the island have repeatedly expressed their eagerness and appealed to the two countries for their all-out support for their independence efforts and the two countries are just a little shy about defending Taiwan.

As the 1950-53 Korean War shows, China has the will and can afford the resources to defend its core interests against any foreign encroachment, no matter how powerful it might seem.

However, another China-U.S. war would be more damaging to both sides in a big way. According to China's National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), the Chinese mainland achieved a gross domestic product (GDP) of 20.9407 trillion yuan, or approximately 2.8 trillion U.S. dollars, in 2006. If Hong Kong SAR and Macau SAR are also included in calculating the mainland's economic output, China has the world's third largest GDP for the year of 2006. Such economic power, though not all of it being capable of turning into warring abilities, will assist China in mobilizing great resources for military campaigns in its efforts to frustrate any substantive pro-I movements.

The U.S. and Japan will have to reconsider the worthiness of their belligerent opposition to China's all-out efforts to reunify Taiwan once they fully understand China's hell-bent determination to do so. A war, if conducted between the world's No. 3 country on one side and the world's top two countries U.S. and Japan on the other side, would mean the end of what the world is today. Will the U.S. and Japan go to that lengths to defend Taiwan's foolhardy independence movements?

It is now increasingly unlikely that China will let the humiliating history repeat itself again. China lost parts of its northern territory to Tsar Russia. But, a rising China cannot bear to lose an island that means the lifeblood of the Chinese nation. And, it has made it clear that it will not lose it.

Taiwan's Independence

By Ian Williams

Self Determination - It's the Law!

China's arguments against Taiwanese self-determination are not particularly legal or ethical. They boil down to the fact that Beijing has over a billion people, a huge economy, and over 900 missiles pointing at the nearby island.

The latter figure, growing by 50 rockets a year, should give a clue to the weakness of Beijing's arguments. In the modern world, few governments can pledge with a straight face to “liberate” an island full of people it pretends are compatriots by blowing them off the map. Equally, while China's “one nation—two systems” transition period for Hong Kong has not been a total failure, Beijing's clumsy interference in Hong Kong's politics and refusal to allow democratic reforms have not done much to reassure the Taiwanese.

More...

China's claim over Taiwan is not a historical one

The governing Constitutions of both ROC and PRC state clearly that Taiwan is part of China. All the governments of the democracies and non-democracies, including U.S. and Japan, respect China's “One China” policy, except for only 24 banana republics. And all the international organizations (e.g. UNO) and standards organizations (e.g. ISO) treat Taiwan as part of China. As you can see from these situations, China's claim over Taiwan is a not a historical one. Rather, they manifest the fact that Taiwan is part of China. As part of China, Taiwan has no right for self-determination that results in its independence from China, as PRC's Constitutions states. If “Taiwan Independence” is a matter, it is one for the whole of China to decide, not only those on the Taiwan island. Contrary to what you believe, it is the view of the entire China ( China's Taiwan plus the mainland plus HK plus Macau) that matters most.

Why does Beijing deploy weapons opposite Taiwan?

China has every justification in deploying armies and weapons to guard its national unity and deterring pro-I forces from making Taiwan a legal separate entity from China. As China has made it clear those armies and weapons are aimed at pro-I people there, not the general Taiwanese people. One of the reasons that the island did not claim independence is that its Constitution prohibits it.

And for that matter, as polls done by Taiwanese show, the overwhelming Taiwanese people want to retain the status quo or unify with the mainland. Thought what this “status quo” means is much disputed, it is clearly defined in the Constitution under which ROC functions. The fact that China (P.R.) has “never governed” Taiwan does not mean China has lost lost its sovereignty over the island that China has enjoyed from the days of an unbroken, successive continuum of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), ROC (1911-1949) and PRC (1949-).

China (PR)'s government of Taiwan manifests itself in other ways: UN kicked ROC out of its organization, no international organization whose members all sovereign, independent countries include ROC as its member (Note: there is no country called Taiwan; to use Taiwan to refer to the ROC is a common-sense, political, geographical mistake. Taiwan did not, does not and will not exist in the list of countries. ), all countries with diplomatic ties with China must respect China's “One-China” Policy.

Also, it is not only the Constitution of PRC but also that of ROC claims Taiwan as one of China's provinces. So far, no one has changed (in this sense, no one dares!) the two constitutions so that Taiwan became independent from China (PRC or ROC).

And the Constitution of ROC still works on the island and governs the government of the island. Until now, no substantive efforts have been waged against the Constitution of ROC that dictates Taiwan as part of China (ROC).

This is for the foreign supporters and bosses of pro-Taiwan Independence forces on the island

Non-Chinese readers, please note: Your fingers in China's Taiwan pie are not welcome. Your corporal support of Taiwan's Independence from China will possibly mean the death of you, because China will try to kill any foreigners who meet us on the battleground of Taiwan's Independence which China violently opposes to. PERIOD

Democracy, a better way of government, but no excuse to justify Taiwan Independence.

To say Hong Kong is a democracy before the handover in 1997 is a load of rubbish. Before that, HK was a COLONY of the British! HK's governors used to be hand-picked by its colonizers in the U.K. China now just retained what the Britons left and wants to decide the democratic progress in HK at its own pace. Everything has been made clear in HK's Basic Law. Don't tell me you have not read the Law before venturing your opinions that criticize China's role in HK's democratic reforms.

Democracy cannot be a reason for Taiwan's independence from China. Do not mix the two things. Whether or not China is democratic has nothing to do with the fact that Taiwan is part of China.

Democracy and non-democracy are just twos forms of government. I'd like to say that democracy has at least two aspects: power and money. Don't tell me the U.S. is a democracy for each and every American. U.S. democracy is a game for the rich.

And don't tell me free speech is also one for every American. In the media world where rich people rule the few media conglomerates, money talks. Of course, there is democracy in the world. But the problem is: who does the “democracy” work in favor of that you're talking about? The rich? The poor? The middle class? African-Americans? Immigrants? Every citizen?

What have China and the U.S. learned from each other in the Korean War?

After the U.S.-led forces were driven back to the south half of the Korean peninsular and had to sign a ceasefire agreement with China, I believe that some people must be quite surprised that after so many humiliating military defeats suffered by China the Communists actually forced U.S. and its small brothers to a negotiating table for some kind of ceasefire agreement with a country they had invaded, robbed, raped, humiliated and exploited since 1840. The lesson for Americans and their fellow invaders has been clear: a New China had come into existence and think twice before taking on China again. Of course, China also learned that U.S. is not a country to be trifled with. This is a two-street scenario. But, if either side wants to live through it all over again, U.S. and China will be in for another ceasefire agreement in the days of nuclear winter, if the two countries are still there in the new winter at all! I believe this is a nightmare both sides (China vs. U.S./its Allies) try to avoid. China has the will to keep Taiwan within its territory. But, does the U.S. have the will to fight China on behalf of pro-I Taiwanese for an island the People's Republic of China (1949- ) inherited from the Republic of China (1911-1949) that inherited from the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911)? I doubt it. Because this time, it is China with 1.3 billion people, the bombs, satellites, spaceships, warheads, etc. Most important, with the support of its people.

Saber-rattling? It's no bluff.

All I have said above is rubbish, a waste of time and breath. The supporting argument for the rubbish is simple: might is right. China has that might to keep Taiwan within its territory, regardless of what any pro-I people for Taiwan are talking about and doing.

To pro-Independence people in Taiwan: Your status quo is mercifully granted by the Central Government in Beijing. It is like air. If Beijing chooses to cut it, or end it in the case of the status quo, you will feel what China has justifiably claims over the island where you live. China will not hesitate to kill you if you put up corporal resistance against China’s advancing armies.

Saber-rattling? Of course, it is. Power and might set rules, not talks. That is the rule of the world. U.S. can invade Iraq and kill its people on dreamed-of mass-construction weapon grounds. Who can and who will stop it? No one! Even when what U.S. commits is crime! And China is rightly guarding its territory!

To pro-I people for Taiwan in the U.S., Japan, and their allies: China is justifiably guarding its territory. Any foreign fingers in our Taiwan's pie will be severed from any of you who dare to put them on the island.

Force is China’s last choice. China has made it clear in its Anti-Secession Law.

One interesting point: If China is truly “democratic”, its voters will vote people into office who promise to unify Taiwan by force if the authorities on the island continues to behave badly. The pro-I people on Taiwan should thank non-democratic CPC for their corporal existence on the island.

Democracy can be a reason for Taiwan Independence?

Also, democracy should not be a reason for Taiwan Independence. Democracy and independence are two things. Mainland China’s non-democracy does not justify Taiwan’s Independence. Moreover, I believe democracy is only of talks, not in practice. I’d prefer to say that democracy and non-democracy are two just two names used to identify a better and a less better form of government. All the fundamental rights belong to the rich and the powerful. In the West, the rich rules, and in mainland China, the CPC rules. No fundamental difference exists between the two because only a revolving door separates them.

Why does ROC exists?

The very reason for the survival of the state on the island after 1949 is that the Central Government in Beijing has elected NOT to unify it, by force if necessary. None of the governments of all the countries around the world dare to challenge the fact that Taiwan is part of China, except for 24 out-of-the-way, panhandling banana republics located in nowhere.

Is Taiwan a democracy in its true sense?

A small point to ponder over: In a democracy, its constitution is something to be played with? Yet Taiwan's officials call the island Taiwan a “country”, yet its constitution calls it ROC! Don’t tell me the island is a democracy because I think the Taiwan's version of democracy is a mockery of what it claims to be. The shameless, manipulative and crafty “President” Chen refuses to be booted from his office even though nearly half of the people who voted him into office want to fire him. He is truly proud of his Taiwan-make democracy? Come on! Does he believe what he says? Chen Shuibian is the cheekiest politician I've ever heard of in any democracies that are considered so--- after a fashion. He is rubbish, never keeps promises, is corrupt and has the nerve to stay in office! Is all this called “democratic”?

To call Taiwan a country or parallel it with countires is a mistake

First of all, for Taiwan, an island in a geographical sense or a Chinese administrative sense (in this case, the Province of Taiwan), that pretends to be a nation or a country, the Constitution of ROC, under which the island runs, says the state is called the Republic of China. The Republic of Taiwan is yet to be born and will never be born! Second, so far, Taiwan has been a geographical term and no country in the world has awarded diplomatic recognition to the island as “Taiwanese Republic”. A Taiwan State or Nation only in talks? Anyone who claims that Taiwan is a country is an idiot or pretends to be one. Chen Shuibian, the corrupt boss on the island who brazens out to continue in office, is officially called the President of the Republic of China, not Taiwan!

"Is Taiwan part of China?"-"Yes!"

The People's Republic of China's (PRC) Constitution and its Anti-Secession Law say yes. And the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), the residual state system having survived a four-year civil war (1945-49) with Communists still runs the island, also says yes. The very reason for the existence of the surviving ROC on the island is that the PRC's Central Government in Beijing has elected NOT to dismantle it after it assumed the role of ruling the whole of China from ROC in 1949. In the best interests of the Chinese nation, the Central Government wants a peaceful, "One Country, Two Systems" reunification with Taiwan.

To continue with the above discussion entailing complicated, contentious historical and legal points would require extensive research, which is not what I want to deal with in this posting. For example, a Western scholar even argues that China is a culture that pretends to a country. It might take months of research and study of historical, legal and social books for an amateur like me to challenge his conviction. My first-minute response to his point is that he says only half the thing. As I see it, China is a country that is united by one culture. Another startling assertion is that, according to some arrangement, Taiwan is a territory of the United States that puts the island in the hands of the occupying ROC after WWII ended with Japan surrendering the island to the Allied Forces in 1945. People of this opinion go on to say that the reason why neither PRC nor ROC owns Taiwan is that the arrangement did not specify to whom the island was surrendered. And that's why the U.S. has a relations act with the island and justifiably sells weapons to Taiwan, one of its territories, according to that frame of thinking. This is a word game: By one treaty, China lost Taiwan to Japan; and by another, Japan lost Taiwan to an unidentified entity, but not China. Who is it to be, then, if not China? China lost a piece of its soil to an enemy in a failed war and couldn't take it back even when the enemy was defeated?

Beijing has provided a good and operational framework into which Taiwan can again live under one flag with the rest of China: "One Country, Two Systems". To use force to reunify the nation is the worst choice that China has desperately tried to avoid. China has had enough of such internecine within itself and wars with foreign countries in its history. Too much of them! But, this does not mean China will do nothing violent if its patience and endurance are tested to the extremes and it fears it would lose Taiwan again.

In my opinion, things have not changed too much since British-French forces burned down the Summer Place in Beijing in 1860 and European, American and Asian democracies invaded China and occupied Beijing in 1900. The rule of the game is still "might is right". Today's China has means, ways, resources, capabilities, will and domestic popular support (if reasonable) to have it all its own way, at least of keeping Taiwan part of its territory, which China is justified to do according to China's Constitution and the Anti-Secession Law.