Asian Air 
Imagemap

GOLDSEA | ASIAMS.NET | ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES


TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
OR UNIFICATION?

(Updated Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 05:55:10 PM)

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?

This interactive article is closed to new input.
Discussions posted during the past year remain available for browsing.

Asian American Videos


Films & Movies Channel


Humor Channel


Identity Channel


Vocals & Music Channel


Makeup & Hair Channel


Intercultural Channel

CONTACT US | ADVERTISING INFO

© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.

WHAT YOU SAY

[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]
"FLG is a cult. The leader, Li Hongzhi, believes he is above Jesus and every political leader in the world. It is only because western nations are not yet a direct target of the FLG that they are tolerated. If FLG hijacked a TV station in the USA....they would meet the same fate here."

Jing Cha and others should be made aware of the fact that Falun Gong is against interracial coupling of Chinese and non Chinese. Go check it out.
The Only Truth    Tuesday, October 01, 2002 at 05:04:11 (PDT)    [205.188.209.107]
- FLG is a cult. The leader, Li Hongzhi, believes he is above Jesus and every political leader in the world. It is only because western nations are not yet a direct target of the FLG that they are tolerated. If FLG hijacked a TV station in the USA....they would meet the same fate here

that's very interesting that you say that but do me a favor...
i dare you to find 10 reports of chinese suicides related to falun gong in either canada, america or britain.

i also want you to tell me how falun gong is
#1 hijaking satellites (wtf?)
#2 stealing nuclear weapons and
#3 plotting to kill zheng zhemin?

because thats what i read was happening in china. you tell me those things and ill gladly label it a cult.

"all religions are cults, but unlike religion, a cult has no political power"
-jing ye
Jing Cha    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 18:05:45 (PDT)    [61.170.128.96]
Look at Jing Cha...he's a black guy who's engaged to a Chinese from China women. Yet thinks China is the Borg....?

correction, im a black guy thats married (september 22, 2002) to a chinese woman. i think china is like #1 a beehive, #2 the borg, #3 an ant colony. why? have you ever tried to have a serious conversation with a government official here? their way is right, everyone else is wrong. if the prc says it, it is true, if the prc says it is isnt true, it isnt true.

i never understood what al pacino said in scarface about communism (in the first 10 minutes) until i spent time in a communist country. however, china isnt communist in the sense of the word. they are capitalist by practice and communist by name. i havent seen any equality since ive been here. the rich are better off than the poor (no ) and the city of shanghai (this nations thriving capitol is like a picture that has been airbrushed so you cant see any flaws.

a thriving capitol with no infrastructure. whens the last time you been here dropout?

Im about to go to Hang Zhou today for Buisness. Hope these trains are better than I think theyll be.
Jing Cha    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 18:00:49 (PDT)    [61.170.128.96]

By the way, China needs to fight some real wars before they know what they can do.
Iraq looked pretty good on paper before the Gulf War.
huu76    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 16:39:31 (PDT)    [64.231.98.120]
SOG,
Scratch England and Russia as two countries who can beat Afghanistan. The French suck at fighting and the rest of Europe are cowards.

Canada doesn't have the will to even field a decent army.

I don't deny I'm Chinese. I'm quite proud of being Chinese. However, I feel North America's system is the best, and they should/can do whatever they want to protect it.
Name any country in history that treats it's citizens (even it's enemies) so well.

Romans: Allowed slavery, and were bent on conquest.
Russia/China: Disallows free speech and dissent.
British: Endorsed white supremacy for most of it's stint as global superpower.
India: Encourages caste rule.
As far as I know, the closest civlization to the United States would be the Egyptians before they embraced Islam.
huu76    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 16:37:49 (PDT)    [64.231.98.120]
AC Dropout,
I'm not asian, obviously, but I kinda disagree with your statement

"Since no peace treaty was ever signed for the Chinese Civil War...it basically mean the definition of ROC will be defined by "Might makes Right" in the near future."

What if the mighty PRC decides that might makes right means basically do whatever is necessary to bring taiwanese people back into the fold of communist chinese thinking whether they like it or not. That's not fair. Democratic people have a profound reason for not wanting to be under communist dictatorship. True - china does have a politburo (sp?) but that's not democracy. Taiwanese democracy is probably lacking too, but it's communism that's for sure.

If 50% of taiwanese want to maintain status quo then how can chinese communists merely align the whole ROC into PRC. Status quo does not mean they're open to chinese rule.
Political Observer    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 12:38:24 (PDT)    [167.230.38.7]
"Who knows. You never met an "Egg" in Highschool or College. White people who are so enamoured with asian culture that they hang with the asian crowd and what not."

Never in high school, but I did in college.

"Look at Jing Cha...he's a black guy who's engaged to a Chinese from China women. Yet thinks China is the Borg....?"

Well, a lot of people share that opinion, including folks in Japan, Korea, and Singapore. I have to say here, there is no mystery to being Chinese. Chinese are not above being understood by other races and nations. This notion that Chinese are somehow so different that they defy the interpretive powers of others is, I must say, humorous in the least.

At the same time, overseas Chinese are generally not wrapped up in a love affair with our mainlander brethren. In Singapore, there are many, many more derogatory epithets for mainlanders than for whites.

"But like Sean says, your view points are extremely "white" in natural. Perhaps it is the generation gap and the fact the younger posters on the board are growing up in a different time."

Could be. I do believe I'm older than the average poster here, so I'm amazed that my views should be so counter to the mainstream--I'm used to it being the other way around.

Then and again, I'm not from the mainland (at least, not directly). So to me, there's less face involved in stating my position of these matters. Whether you accept them or not is, in the final analysis, up to you as individuals.

But still...this constant hammering on whites. Are our egos so fragile that we must always resort to drawing things down to so low a denominator?
Apache Driver    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 12:35:37 (PDT)    [67.84.132.190]
Taiwan more corrupt than China? You got to be kidding right? Ever do business in Taiwan and China? Get a clue, drop the years of irreversible brain-washing and think objectively.
disappointed    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 11:41:40 (PDT)    [64.232.222.10]
Apache.

The Chinese dont have a very capable anti air defence for their surface fleet, however their new dystroyers are quite capable the sovermny EM is a monstor having a barrage of S-300PU SAM quite capable of defending against air attacks and ACSM.

Also the 168 and 169, 170 dystroyers are thought to have good defensive capabilities, the 170 is comparable to the arleigh burke class.

China will have a long way to go before able to protect her carrier effectivly. I dont know about US but the russians are developing a MACH 4 yakhont ASCM this sucker will defeat the aegis system.

Carriers as rumsfield has said "is a floating coffin".

Even if china did build her carrier, although good for morale and experience in practical terms are quite useless, besides she dosent even have carrier capable air craft.
SOG    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 10:12:56 (PDT)    [128.193.169.80]
SOG,

This is drifting a bit away from where I think we're supposed to be, but very quickly:

"US aint nothing without her allies, give me a break, do you know anything about the military? OMG"

The US does not need any allies to prosecute a war pretty much anywhere on the globe. While other militaries have not only drawn down and reshaped themselves to more moderately resemble police forces focused on internal security, they've also allowed their logistics structures to be disassembled and stood down. This is not a new thing; remember the Balkan crisis of the early 1990s? The reasons the Euros didn't deal with that situation (which was in their own backyard) is not necessarily because they didn't want to; they couldn't. They didn't have the loggy support to roll stock into the area.

"woo hoo they beat afganistan, so can 100 other countries too. But in reality the afganis had civil war.

Northen alliance, forgot that?"

The Northern Alliance was only marginally effective. The US made a tremendous operational error in allowing them to be used as the forward elements of the attack on Tora Bora; even with cyclical B-52 and B-1 strikes and with USN CAS, they couldn't advance with synchonicity and fell back before Al Qaida recce by fire techniques. And at Shah-i-kot, one entire NA "division" never showed up for the fight, causing 10 Mountain and 101 ABN to come forward out of their blocking positions and chase Al Qaida hither and yon.

And in the beginning, the NA wouldn't come out of their revetted positions until US airstrikes essentially blasted Taliban forces out of the way. The Taliban were under-equipped and under-supplied; the NA had been getting new rolling stock and Class III, V, and IX supplies from Russia and the US for two to three months.

The real utility of the Northern Alliance was that it gave the Taliban and Al Qaida something else to shoot at other than Americans.
This is offered for informational purposes only.
Apache Driver    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 10:07:44 (PDT)    [67.84.132.190]
Gosh, I really do hope China will take over Taiwan, either by force or not.

(1) China will conveniently acquire all the weaponry and technology Taiwan bought from the U.S. And if China does successfully invade and take over Taiwan, that will be the "definining moment" in modern China history and China will officially become a superpower. (Look up military and political science literature if you want to know what "defining moment" means. The defining moment of the U.S. as a superpower is when U.S. defeated Spain in the America-Spanish war.) If China becomes a recognized superpower, then the social status of Chinese everywhere around the world will rise. People will probably still hate China, but at least they will also fear and respect China. (Yes, Chinese is discriminated in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world partly because China is pathetic. Unfortunately, the fate of overseas Chinese is tied to China whether they like it our not.)

(2) Millions of Chinese will escape Taiwan when China takes over, and most of them will settle in the U.S. That means a huge jump of Chinese population in the U.S. Taiwan Chinese is probably the least passive and most aggressive Asians. And they are loaded (with $, that is.) That means a mass exodus of Chinese from Taiwan to the U.S. will ultimately lead to more power to Asians in American in the long run.
China, Invade Taiwan Now!    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 09:18:58 (PDT)    [207.167.97.247]
jing cha,

If you are such an expert on China and Taiwan. Answer this little question of "Freedom." Citizens of ROC and travel freely in the PRC. However, citizens of PRC cannot travel freely in the ROC. Why is that? If the ROC is a proponent of democracy and freedom as you claim.
AC Dropout    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 07:31:40 (PDT)    [24.90.98.143]
Apache Driver,

"What utility is there in being a white pretending to be a Chinese?"

Who knows. You never met an "Egg" in Highschool or College. White people who are so enamoured with asian culture that they hang with the asian crowd and what not.

Look at Jing Cha...he's a black guy who's engaged to a Chinese from China women. Yet thinks China is the Borg....?

But like Sean says, your view points are extremely "white" in natural. Perhaps it is the generation gap and the fact the younger posters on the board are growing up in a different time.
AC Dropout    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 06:58:52 (PDT)    [24.90.98.143]
jing cha,

Your understanding of the Strait issue is totally misconstrued.

Your understanding of history for China and Taiwan are lacking.

Facts:

- Taiwan has only had a reformed democratic system since 1987. Before that it was a similar one party system and was under martial law. It is an extremely corrupt system by USA and PRC standards. Unlike the PRC crackdown on corruption rarely occur

- Taiwan is extremely pro-business, there are hardly any labor unions in existance. I've never heard of them.

- FLG is a cult. The leader, Li Hongzhi, believes he is above Jesus and every political leader in the world. It is only because western nations are not yet a direct target of the FLG that they are tolerated. If FLG hijacked a TV station in the USA....they would meet the same fate here.

- The 3 postions in Taiwan is pro-unification, pro-independence, and status quo. The demographic is all across the island. The position are usually 25% unification, 25% independence, 50% status quo.

- Remember these are opposition sides in a civil war. Spy have been caught on both sides. Both sides have weapons. Neither side is really and innocent by-stander in the affair.

- Since no peace treaty was ever signed for the Chinese Civil War...it basically mean the definition of ROC will be defined by "Might makes Right" in the near future.
AC Dropout    Monday, September 30, 2002 at 06:48:30 (PDT)    [24.90.98.143]
SOG,

"It would not to china good to build CVG battle groups. She has long ago the capability to build carriers.

Modernization of the PLAN will be depedent on the new generation of dystroyers and SSBNs.

Carriers are not necassary to take taiwan as china is a unsinkable carrier right along side taiwan. A carrier only is costly target for US forces."

I agree with you in that a carrier group would be generally useless in assisting the PRC in an attempt to retake Taiwan militarily. I think the introduction of one would be an interesting element, but not really germane.

It would, however, give the PRC a maneuver element to use elsewhere. I don't know if the benefit of having a CVG or CVGs is worth the cost, however.

By the way, USN assets are built around the cruiser--in a CVG, it's not the carrier which is the command vessel, it's rotated amongst the cruisers.
Apache Driver    Sunday, September 29, 2002 at 20:12:27 (PDT)    [67.84.132.190]
Huu

Whatever, You can deny you got chinese blood in you all day long. Wont change a thing.

Who said dont love canada?

US aint nothing without her allies, give me a break, do you know anything about the military? OMG

woo hoo they beat afganistan, so can 100 other countries too. But in reality the afganis had civil war.

Northen alliance, forgot that?

Give me a break.
SOG    Sunday, September 29, 2002 at 19:34:27 (PDT)    [216.239.163.212]

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS