TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
OR UNIFICATION?
(Updated )

he most pressing Asian foreign policy issue currently faced by the U.S. is the Taiwan question. The email we receive in reaction to our articles relating to this issue suggests that it's an emotional one for many of our readers. Perhaps one reason for the emotion is the fact that the issue isn't amenable to an easy or simple solution.
     The first historical mention of Taiwan appears to have been when Portugese traders found it to be a resting place on their journey to Japan and named it Isla Formosa. Beijing's claim to Taiwan dates back to the 16th century when a Chinese general fought off the Portugese to claim the island for the emperor. In 1895 the expansion-minded Japanese annexed it after defeating China in a war on the Corean peninsula. China briefly reestablished sovereignty over Taiwan following Japan's defeat in August of 1945.
     At the time the official government of China, as recognized by most nations of the world, was under the control of the Kuomingtang headed by Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek. He was engaged in a desperate war against Mao Tse-tung's peasant army. Despite billions of dollars of aid by the U.S. based mainly on intensely partisan reporting by Henry Luce's Time/Life empire, the spectacularly corrupt Chiang lost that war and fled to Taiwan with 2.5 million followers.
     He established the present government of Taiwan on December 7, 1949 and proclaimed it the sole legitimate government of all China. Mao made the same claim. The claims competed until 1971 when it became clear to most of the world that Mao's was more persuasive. Taiwan was kicked out of the UN. The Beijing government took its place as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a seat given in recognition of China's role in fighting Japan in World War II.
     Mired in its own misguided war in Vietnam, and intensely fearful of anything red, the U.S. was one of the last nations to recognize the legitimacy of Mao's government. In 1972 Richard Nixon made his historic journey to Beijing. In 1976 the U.S. took the next step by recognizing the People's Republic as China's sole legitimate government. It began pursuing the "One China, One Taiwan" policy under which official diplomatic contacts were exclusively with Beijing but continued to sell billions of dollars a year of fighter jets, helicopters, tanks and missiles to Taiwan to help defend against a possible Chinese effort to refunify by force.
     In 1997 President Clinton declared a "strategic partnership" with Beijing over intense Republican objections. It was an astute recognition of the fact that China's 1.2 billion people must be accorded a central place in U.S. foreign policy. But the historic, moral and economic ties that bind the U.S. to Taiwan's 23 million people stand squarely in the way of cutting off arms sales and renouncing the pact under which the U.S. obliged itself to come to Taiwan's defense in the event of attack by China. That U.S. pledge and continuing arms sales continue to inflame Beijing to periodic bursts of violent anti-U.S. rhetoric.
     Taiwan has been a domocracy since 1989 when it legalized opposition parties. It held its first democratic presidential elections in 1990. Lee Teng-hui handily won to keep the presidency which he had originally gained in 1988. Lee won again in 1996. Since 1997 he began efforts to warm up relations with Beijing by agreeing to enter into negotiations under a "One-China" framework with an eye toward eventual reunification. Beijing's leaders continued their highly successful campaign of pressuring diplomatic partners into severing ties with Taiwan. China even raised hell when Lee made a semi-surreptitious trip to New York in 1997. Since then China has scared neighborning nations like the Philippines into not allowing Lee to enter. As of 1999 Taiwan's diplomatic allies number about 18 out of about 220 nations on earth. All are tiny, impoverished Central American, African and Pacific Island nations that appreciate Taiwan's generous aid packages. Pago Pago is considered a major ally.
     Feisty Lee Teng-hui launched his own guerilla offensive in July, 1999 by declaring over German radio that Taiwan was in fact a separate state and would negotiate with Beijing on an equal footing. That sent Beijing into a tizzy. It fired off bombastic threats to take Taiwan by force and to annhilate the U.S. Navy if it intervenes. On October 18 during his British visit Chinese President Jiang Zemin assumed a softer, more relaxed tone in telling a London newspaper that China would be peacefully reunited with Taiwan under a one-nation two-systems formula by the middle of the next century. One might have expected Lee to have been relieved by that statement. Instead, he brushed it aside as "a hoax". China should try instead to set a timetable for its democratization as that was the only way to ensure reunification, sneered Lee's Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi. Most polls show that a clear majority of Taiwanese prefer to maintain the status quo indefinitely rather than moving toward unification.
     Beijing's reunification mandate appears based on the idea that in winning the mainland, the Chinese people had rejected the "criminal" Kuomingtang and its right to rule any part of China. It also sees Taiwan as a galling symbol of the division wrought and preserved by western imperialists -- namely, the U.S. -- seeking to enjoy global hegemony at the expense of Chinese dignity.
     Meanwhile the U.S. remains on the hook to defend Taiwan and sell it arms though doing so keeps its relations with a quarter of humanity rocky and on edge. Under its current policy the U.S. is the asbestos firewall that keeps friction between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait from igniting into war.
     Should the U.S. continue alienating Beijing to help Taiwan protect its independence or improve relations with China by pressuring Taiwan to reunite? d of e,

I don't doubt what you say about the pro-independence supporters who hold ROC passports. However, they are not a clear majority either.

The demographic to ROC has been for quite sometime 1/3 pro-unification, 1/3 status quo, 1/3 independence.

I sympathize with those in the ROC who have fallen on hard times. I employ people on the island, so I have an understanding of the economic situation in the ROC for the past 2 years.

However, I point agian to the ignorance of the masses to believe that China displaced them. I see it more as a lack of foresight and vision in the leadership of ROC to prepare Taiwan for the rise in PRC economonically as quickly as it did.

It is a complex situation on ROC of how the current situation came to be. One factors is the shortsightedness of the DDP party to choose the grass root movement of independence as their only major platform. Another part of the problem lies in the shortsightedness of the KMT not to engage the PRC productively after 1985.

Much of this situation is Taiwan's own trapping. Ignorance, Political self-fishness, and inability to adapt to democratic systems are usual culprit I fault.

If a faction of Taiwan wishes to become poorer by the day in order to retain political autonomy for the less than 1000 people that hold office in Taiwan, their wish is coming true.

The pan-blue and pan-green camps really need to end their petty bickering and adopt a united strategy to engage China pro-actively. Personally I do not think ambiguity is the anser. Since ROC is not the USA and does not have to resources to keep China "guessing."

Waishenren vs. Bendiren. I am a person of both heritage. I know it is an effective card. Since I use it to my advantage when I can. But then again it is a reflection of ignorance on the island. Also in the younger generation, since there are more individuals like myself as time goes on, I rarely see a definitive split of waishenren and bendiren in my generation. So unless you are growing up in the some village in Taiwan, or in exclusive Neihu neighborhood in Taipei. This bendi and waishen issue is becoming less of an issue over time.

"i have a question for you on this then, what are most of the taiwanese to do then, even if they do face the reality of the prc becoming one of the strongest nation economically and politically, in the world?"

In my opinion, Taiwan need to engage the PRC pro-actively. It cannot use the excuse of dignity and equal standing to evade the situation. Without engaging the PRC pro-actively, much of Taiwan's limited man power in government will to wasted on "ambiguity," instead of leading ROC to a prosperous future.

Another aspect of ROC politics that needs to mature is the constant bickering. I you follow ROC politics how much energy is wasted on bickering instead of actually working for the country.
AC Dropout    Thursday, February 06, 2003 at 16:07:32 (PST)    [24.136.115.189]

ac dropout

what you are saying is abosultely valid and there is little doubt that the prc is going to be the centre for commercial and industrial development in the 21st century- everyone knows that and most taiwanese knows that; this is not the problem, the problem is that the current government cannot express any kind of warmth towards the prc because of its ideologies- it has always been a very pro-independence party so you can't expect it to throw it all away as people will then feel that political there is much differentiations between the kmt and the ddp.

yes, the investors in china probably do contribute the most in terms of taxes but as i have said so of the taiwanese would rather give up thier economy for political sovereignty and there is actuualy quite a substancial number of them around, even overseas.

you mentioned that only the older generationhas resentment towards the kmt and waishengren but you will be very wrong there- a lot of intra pro-independence taiwanese parents continually 'educate' their children the atrcities thatthe kmt commited when they first arrived at taiwan and there is now a young generation of ultra pro-independence taiwanese teenagers. the ddp also sometimes uses the waishengren card to win support from the benshengren and it is sad to say that it is quite effective.

'The real traitors to the ROC are those we are unwilling, because their own ignorance, to face the reality of what the PRC is becoming.'

i have a question for you on this then, what are most of the taiwanese to do then, even if they do face the reality of the prc becoming one of the strongest nation economically and politically, in the world? most of them do know this and some have invested in the prc and have also contributed to the roc with the profits they have made. but what about the working-class people who have lost their jobs to their chinese counterparts? you might say "tough, that's life" but you can't blame them for feeling resentful towards the prc. by the way, i am by no means a pro-reunification or pro-independence supporter, i just want the best for taiwan. it is easy for us to critise some pro-independnce taiwanese because they are too ignorant or appear to be but this does not stop me from sympathising with them as both you and i do not know what it is like to live in taiwan now and do not know what they are really going through.

'Pop culture is what japanize or amercanize manifest itself on the ROC. I don't see it planning a big part in the strait issue. Since the ROC ignores both the USA and Japan on various soveriegnty issues. '

it doesn't. just because on is americanised does not mean that one has to listen to everything the usa says.
d of e    Wednesday, February 05, 2003 at 14:00:53 (PST)    [172.181.77.187]
D of E,

In my recent disscussion with relative involved in politics on Taiwan. I get more and more disgusted with these nonsense plans they put in legislation. It has become too obvious to me that they are no longer interested in the true welfare of Taiwan. And are more interested in remaining in office for as long as possible.

Even the AIT (American Institute in Taiwan) advocates that ROC must engage the PRC in a productive manner, or they will miss out on the 21st century development. I hate the AIT to the very core with their impractical nonsense lamenting about democracy above all, but yet this engaged the PRC advise is the only advise I have ever agreed with that came out of the AIT.

500,000 on the mainland are traitors to ROC? They're probably the highest tax paying people in Taiwan.

The real traitors to the ROC are those we are unwilling, because their own ignorance, to face the reality of what the PRC is becoming.

As for feeling repressed by the KMT. Only the older generation hold these views.

War on terror. I believe PRC offically support USA war on terror initiative. I believe ROC has not given an offical stance on the topic.

Pop culture is what japanize or amercanize manifest itself on the ROC. I don't see it planning a big part in the strait issue. Since the ROC ignores both the USA and Japan on various soveriegnty issues.
AC Dropout    Tuesday, February 04, 2003 at 10:05:23 (PST)    [24.136.115.189]
D of E,

I understand that many people on ROC are anti-China. But a lot of that stems from ROC anti-CCP propoganda during the 40's - late 80's. Geez I remember in kindergarten in ROC all those stupid slogans of saving our mainland compatriots during the 70's.
AC Dropout    Tuesday, February 04, 2003 at 09:37:34 (PST)    [24.136.115.189]
AC Dropout

It is indeed a no win situation for taiwan, politically or economically which is why i agree with people who recognise that the most best possible for the taiwanese now, in regard to the china-taiwan political situation, is to stay as ambiguous as possible. Having said that, whether it is politically fesable for a ultra pro-independce government to do so is another matter. as i've mentioned earlier, the taiwanese economy is trapped because in the way the DDP is obliged to play the political card since this how it got to power in the first place. you have been very been very rational in your arguements that full indepence is an unlikely option but i'm sorry to tell you this- many people in the ROC are VERY anti-china, especailly those in the south and although a lot of them are undoubtly highly educated and extremely clever indeed, they are not always rational ( and no human being is), a lot of them feel repressed by kuomingtang or by china and they are blind towards the consequences of independence- one ddp politician sums their view up almost perfectly- "what is the point of a strong economy if we are not even a country?"- this implies a 'independence at all costs' attitude and it could not be further from the truth- look at the economy in taiwan now but the die hard pro-taiwanese are still standing firmly by chen's side even though they are hit as much as or if not, even more than their northern neighbours. they don't care if the ddp is incompetant, they don't care if they now have less to eat, they just want a republic of taiwan. you mentioned that there are about half a million taiwanese in the mainland- pardon my french, they don't give a **** about them. to them, they are just traitors. you might not agree with me on these issues, maybe due to your experiences, but i just want to voice mine and my family is closely involved to many dimplomatic famalies and i have seen and heard many heated debates and personally witnessed just how far out these pro-taiwan supporters are willing to go.

as america commences its 'war on terror' campaign, it now increasily need chinese support or at least indifference, therefore, it is unlikely to do anything which would sour this relationship.

as for the japan and us affinity issue that taiwan has, you said

I grant you Taiwan has a strong affinity to Japanese culture. But Japan has one of the worst colonized mentality of all asian nation when it comes to western culture. So is this were Taiwan gets it's nonsense USA kowtowing attitude.....Japan?!?

i very much doubt that- the 'USA kowtowing attitude' you speak of exist in most countries and all captialist countries- it is a result of globalisation and amercanisation. it is not that difficult to understand why really... the world's richest and most powerful country. do not get me wrong i personally am not a big fan of america as there is too much hyprocracy but it is easy to understand the rationale benhind that. moreover, just because a county is japanesenised doesn't mean that it is amercanised at the same time- japanese and american cultures are still very very different and i fail to see how taiwnaese firms mixing japanese and chinese on tv and on magazines are signs of americanisation instead of a purely japanese influence.
D of E    Monday, February 03, 2003 at 12:34:40 (PST)    [172.183.123.165]

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS