|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
OR UNIFICATION?
(Updated
Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 05:55:07 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.
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.]
SOG,
The freedom lovers would have company with the Communist freedom haters.
Taiwan belongs to U.S.,
I'd say Taiwan belongs by itself, and I'm sure the U.S. is happy as long as it's not part of China.
General Theory,
I have a sneaking suspiscion that China is secretly funding Bin-Laden. Who has the most to gain from the weakening of the U.S? While America goes on a wild goose chase, China is free to push its weight around.
Bush should just say outright to the UN (not like they matter anyway), "any country who opposes U.S. action (hello China) against Iraq/terrorist colaborators will get a nuke dropped on them for each attack against the United States. If the end of the world is worth protecting some diaper head, then you're stupider than we could ever have imagined."
Of course, the easiest solution would be to nuke the entire middle east, that way China and their freedom hating toadies (along with the weaklings in Europe) can't bitch that the U.S. is taking sides. Dead Jews and dead Muslims ar all the same to me.
AC,
That sounds like liberal democratic crap! I like the talk softly and carry a big stick idea better. If you don't like what's happening at home, deal with the despots and dictators who are stealing and killing you. Leave us alone and things are okay. If you mess with us, don't complain when you get beat down.
Don't forget that before WWII, the U.S. has mainly been isolationist. Their concerns were for the Western Hemisphere. The rise of the U.S.S.R. forced them to become the protector of democracy. If some toes have to get stepped on to protect the rest, then that's a price that has to be paid (especially if those toes belong to people who don't know what democracy is anyway).
huu76   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 20:03:01 (PDT)
   [64.231.96.224]
A little military class for you all who think US can easily defeat china and protect taiwan.
1.) US only will send at most 3 carrier groups in, that will take a few days at least.
2.) China has the sunbrun Anti Ship Crusie Missile. This baby goes mach 3 and huggs the sea. making it hard to intercept by radar. US Dystoryers have close in defense the phalanx which can pump out an amazing 20,000 rounds a minute. But but.. the sunburn dives underneath the water before impact making interception almost impossiable.
3.) China is acquiring JH-7A and The SU-30MKK and the J-10. These guys can each load 3 ASCM+ and a few hundred of these birds will sent hundreds of ASCM at any US naval force making life very unbearable.
4.) China is going to have 12 Kilo subs from russia by 2005, these guys will force the US navy to significantly slow down their progress.
5.) China has too many shore launched ASCM. boom boom boom.
Conclusion. I honestly think the US will suffer unbearable losses and even then it will fail to protect taiwan. It would be a sad day for the world if the US and China started duking it out!
SOG   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 14:29:42 (PDT)
   [128.193.4.98]
Taiwan belongs to us
Ok smart guy. Lets duke it out! and see.
Thats just real smart of you to trade the US for Taiwan. Umm so we all live in a nuclear wasteland, woopeee
FYI on a one on one during WW2 germany would have beat the livng **** out of the US. They had some superb generals and equipment.
US, Britian, Italy, Russia, France, Poland, host of other countries vs germany. ummmm. ooooo US so darn good aint she?
SOG   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 14:22:13 (PDT)
   [128.193.4.98]
"Well bud, If you want to see china and US duke it out, then support taiwanese freedom. Just keep in mind, the PRC can take out anyplace in the US. And make this world a wasteland for dead freedom lovers like you."
Granted.
And as well, the PRC will also be a radiation-filled wasteland.
With today's technology, there is no such thing as "winning" a nuclear war. the PRC could concievably "pre-emptively self defend" themselves by launching first, but the USA computers will signal all red for incoming bogeys, and we will launch everything that we have in the 20 minutes that it will take for the ICBMs from China to get here.
The same goes if the USA is brain-dead enough to "pre-emptively self defend" by attacking China first.
Both sides lose. You can do whatever math, apologetics, and/or excuses you wish to make, the facts don't change that this kind of war ends in mutual defeat.
So, comments like the one you made are silly at best.
And what's so bad about "loving freedom" - how many people in Beijing are allowed to view and post to this website? Just curious.
B.E.Verins beverins@aol.com   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 10:23:55 (PDT)
   [148.4.33.125]
Ummm... the USA is *STILL IN* Afghanistan...
We haven't left.
The same will happen for Iraq as well, we will not leave... ever.
B.E.Verins beverins@aol.com   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 10:16:23 (PDT)
   [148.4.33.125]
Taiwan belongs to US,
Yeah yeah and now the average American is getting poor in a declining economy. Across the pond the average Chinese is getting rich in an expanding economy.
So we fight another war. Next thing I know I'm going to be paying out unemployment tax for half the USA using profits gained in China.
What irony???
AC Dropout   
Monday, October 14, 2002 at 09:00:50 (PDT)
   [24.90.98.143]
Afghanistan survived war with Russia.
Russia and other countries who LOST to the Afghans told America
"you cannot win a war in afghanistan, WAR isnt fought the same way in Afghanistn, etc,etc,etc more BS.
How LONG did it take America to oust the Taliban and pretty much kill a large percentage of te taliban?
America was in and out of there in what...? 6 months? HAHAH
Now tell me this.
Russia and Britain warned America when it went to Kosovo that an AIR war would never be able to by itself, defeat the air and ground defenses of Kosovo.
YOU TELL ME, who won the war in KOSOVO?
I been among the Chinese now for 3 months, in Shanghai China. I hear things like,
"America didnt win WW2", the Allies did"
"America didnt beat Japan, the allies did"
"America shouldnt be policing the world"
"America shouldnt be involved in Taiwan"
I hear these things mostly from Chinese military I live with.
The problem with all these "other people" (read: non-Americans) is that they cry out for american support, when that support comes and DOES ITS JOB, then they get indignant and ingrateful.
the fact is that America is the MOST POWERFUL country on earth in terms of
Weaponry design, forward troop deployment, buying power, and engineering aerospace, nuclear, electromagnetics.
China is 20 years behind the US.
Russia is 10 Years behind the US.
If it wasnt for American intervention in WW2, Europe would be speaking GERMAN.
If it wasnt for American Intervention in WW2 China would now be called, the People's Republic of Japan.
How can anyone, except a FOOL. deny that America WILL win a war with Iraq...(AGAIN). and trounce the Chinese (who have never been in a total war they have won).
Maybe people like Ac Dropout can say that "America isnt all that", or America is not as powerful as the COUNTRY HE FLED...China. But at the end of the day, AC Dropout knows he picked the right side.
Traitor.
Taiwan belongs to US   
Sunday, October 13, 2002 at 22:12:59 (PDT)
   [61.151.233.73]
Freedom lover.
Well bud, If you want to see china and US duke it out, then support taiwanese freedom. Just keep in mind, the PRC can take out anyplace in the US. And make this world a wasteland for dead freedom lovers like you.
Peace and good wishes to all.
SOG   
Saturday, October 12, 2002 at 11:03:51 (PDT)
   [216.239.163.210]
Obviously we have a moral and strategic interest in defending Taiwanese people's freedom and democracy against whatever adversaries there may be - including PRC. Clearly Taiwan has developed a very distinct identity and a social system, and, most importantly, the people want to be Taiwanese (not Chineses) and protect their way of life.
(Also historically and ethnically Taiwan is a very distinct place and has never been consistently part of China. Sure, there are some Nationalists who fled the Chinese Communists on the mainland and settled in Taiwan half a century ago, but today they are a minority.)
Freedom lover   
Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 18:32:13 (PDT)
   [66.87.93.241]
ACDropout,
Tibet, Taiwan, and Falun Gong? So China will support the US if the US backs away from these issues? Why are these issues that America has on China in the first place? This sounds like stealing something from someone and selling it right back to them, a bunch of BS. Tibet and Falun Gong are NON-Issues. Taiwan is. Honestly who the f*** do these crooks think they are holding such things against China? And you heard about the US blasting a number of asian countries over... what? religion?!? Is this some kinda of joke? Considering its own history of race, religion, political freedoms, and a civil war to enforce a union, I'd say China should hold all of these against America.
China should veto whatever US resolutions to turn the world against Iraq, it owes America NOTHING. The US is only trying to pick off countries one by one, and the last stop is, of course, China. Iran, North Corea, etc., etc. know they're already on the list. Do I see sanctions against the United States in the near future?
kimchi d'evil   
Wednesday, October 09, 2002 at 17:41:40 (PDT)
   [205.188.209.107]
US has a very strong tendency to screw her allies HARD and OFTEN
SOG   
Wednesday, October 09, 2002 at 10:47:52 (PDT)
   [128.193.4.98]
kimchi d'evil,
Well Jiang wants to go down in history as the PRC leader that was able to work with the West.
PRC is most likely going to abstain from the UN vote. And will most likely vote Yes, if a deal comes out of the meeting with Bush next month on his ranch. For Bush to get a Yes vote from PRC in the UN security counsel, USA will need to publicly acquience on one or all of the following items: Tibet, Taiwan, or Falun Gong.
As for Iraq. Weren't we, the USA, their allies a couple of decades ago. Was it not us who provide Iraq with the means to build weapons of mass destruction in the first place. Was it not us that screw over the Shite in Iraq with false promises of over throwing Saddam in Dessert Storm. We got lots to answer for in Iraq. I don't believe the current road we are on is going to make matters any better.
As Kissinger once said, "It is safer being an enemy of the USA than an ally of the USA."
AC Dropout   
Tuesday, October 08, 2002 at 10:45:13 (PDT)
   [24.90.98.143]
ACDropout,
Iraq is truly a no-win situation, war or no war, the US will prolly end up getting nuked n' terrorized. A war with iraq to remove saddam and his weapons facilities would polarize the west vs. the middle east (and maybe asia) and put unavoidable pressures on pakistan (and even china/NK) for its technology and materials. After all, it's supply and demand, right? Wouldn't suprise me if they flat out get stolen and not be admitted to (to save face as usual). No war, and well, it's a purdy safe assumption -- unless we're all a bunch of ten-year-olds -- what's gonna happen. Either way, 'we' lose.
I'd say weapons inspections by force (just a lil' bitty war) is the only real solution on the part of the US, if the current admin ever came to its senses. What can I say, I'm in an unbiased mood today, hehe.
All the makings for WWIII... just add water. Maybe it's Europe's turn to sit this one out. And where China is in all of this, I do not know.
kimchi d'evil   
Monday, October 07, 2002 at 15:07:51 (PDT)
   [152.163.195.182]
Apache Driver,
France has had sporatic trash can bombing for the past decade because the Arab immigrants there did not like the French government stance in the middle east.
We so far have been isolated from those types of affairs.
Also we have a nice habit of cutting districts so that minority votes are diluted.
AC Dropout   
Monday, October 07, 2002 at 11:06:33 (PDT)
   [24.90.98.143]
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|