|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE
OR UNIFICATION?
(Updated
Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 05:54:57 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.]
AC,
Since China is so powerful now, might I suggest they shut the door. They obviously don't need outside money.
If China disappeared tomorrow, who'd notice? Who'd care? If the United States disappeared, the world would blow itself apart.
Congratulations, you know how to use a search engine. Good for you.
I noticed it said in there "equal access to ports OPEN for trade". I don't see any mention of using force. Funny how only 2 of 7 countries assumed force was implied. You're analysis stinks. Looking something up on the internet and understanding it are two separate things bucko.
Your peanut brain is doing a poor job of trying to appear well informed.
Builder,
Anybody can be a net exporter of food, all they have to do starve their own people.
huu76   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 16:54:05 (PST)
   [64.231.109.48]
China's threats of force against Taiwan China stated that it will "be forced to adopt all drastic measures possible, including the use of force," if Taiwan refuses indefinitely to pursue "the peaceful settlement of cross-strait reunification through negotiations." The threat of initiating force is never "peaceful." Taiwan seeks to remain an independent nation that upholds its citizens' freedom. China essentially remains a communist dictatorship that shackles its citizens' freedom. The "peaceful" negotiations China seeks with Taiwan is equivalent to a master telling his escaped slave: "You must returned to me voluntarily, so that I may shackle you. If you don't, I will force you into slavery.
Leave Taiwan Alone   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 14:19:29 (PST)
   [138.23.59.235]
"say whatever you want about "freedom of expression" and "human rights." china has a different history and culture than america. why should china follow the west as the model? "
I'd love to hear you say this to the various PhDs who risked their lives to say their truths about Chinese style of "human rights" ..Why did they risk their lives and face long prison terms? Maybe there is something basic about "freedom" in human behaviour and social activity that spans across cultures?
Would you return to the days of rigid Confucianism.. put those women in their place, right? Keep learning to the priveleged few? (at least I agree with the leaders having to be scholars)
Would you prefer returning to the times of the peak of the Cultural Revolution?
there is no relativistic comparison in freedom - either you have it, or you don't. In China, you don't. In the USA, well.. with the TIA Office that's beginning to look like a moot point too.
beverins   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 11:07:38 (PST)
   [148.4.33.125]
"2.Competition with Taiwan - Taiwanese are running toward the mainland. It looks more like cooperation to most (Chinese or foreign) peoples."
Just an observation.. but if so many Taiwanese are "running to the mainland", then the island surely must be looking pretty depopulated by now, even for a population that numbers in the millions.......
What's the stats on how many one-way flights are booked? :-)
beverins   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 10:56:49 (PST)
   [148.4.33.125]
>>>The same way a Chinese person can support a country that treats his Chinese forefather as subhuman. Just look up USA history. Chinese exclusion acts. Institutionalized Discrimination in California Government, etc.>>>
I'd hardly compare the starvation of 30 million people during the CR years to the CE act. That would be like comparing the incarceration of the Japanese Americans during WW2 to the Holocaust. Both are injustices indeed, but I don't think it's even a question to which one's bigger. Besides, the USA has made up for the past injustices done to the Chinese Americans. What has the CCP done? Instead of blaming Mao and his stupid cohorts, they blamed it on the gang of four. Some even claimed no such thing happened or tried to make it sound less important by cutting the numerical figures in half. Also take a look at how prosperous the Chinese American community has become. They are one of the highest earners in American soil and for a population of only 2.4 million, that's quite impressive. What about the average mainlander under the CCP rule? That's right didn't think so.
>>>The same way a Chinese person can support a province that stole money and national treasures from the mainland.>>>
That province you speak of does not wish to be under the communist PRC, what do you expect?
>>>If you are looking for injustice the world is full of it.>>>
And like any CCP supporter, you are using that as an attempt to cover up the injustices that your party has committed.
>>>If you're looking for change in a positive direction I believe the CCP is the "lesser evil" to support for the mainland.>>>
Alrighty then, just continue to let the average mainlander to suffer oppression. I think I after 50+ years, they're pretty much used to it.
>>>Just like Bill Clinton fatten his wallet in office. Just like Bush II. Just like Lee Tung Hui. Just like Chen Shui Ben. >>>
That is just a fact of life in political leadership. Kick backs, soft money, etc... >>>
Yeah but the question is who would you rather have steal from you? Bill Clinton or the CCP? It's bad enough that the average Chinese in the mainland lives in poor economic conditions, the fact that their government continues to steal from them preventing any chance of an improved economic lifestyle is all the world worse. Yes you are right, many U.S. politicians have stolen from me and my fellow American citizen, but we still on our worst day live more well-off than the the average mainland Chinese in his/her best day.
>>>That is called the Grass-is-greener-on-the-other-side phenomenon. On the flip side I also reside in a country where I have to work twice as hard just to gain acceptance among my peers.>>>
Hey atleast you have a chance to prosper. You're given every opportunity to prosper in a well-off democracy and you're complaining about discrimination? Tell that to the millions of Chinese residing in the countryside fielding their rice-paddies earning less than a dollar a day. Do you know what they'd do to be in your position? It's evidenced by the fact that thousands of Chinese risk their lives jumping on Cargo containers every year here in the U.S.
>>>When I reside in China and Taiwan the last thing I need to worry about is "I am I acting too Chinese.">>>
Well no kidding sherlock, you're around your own people, why would you need to worry about discrimination?
The Truth   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 10:46:17 (PST)
   [138.23.59.235]
The Truth,
What are you smoking. The entire US is made up of immigrants. We get immigrants from Europe every year. We get immigrants from Japan also. We get immigrants from Germany. Those are the two top industrialized nations after the USA.
Immigration only reflects the desire of the individuals who wishes to immigrate, it does not reflect the prosperity of the source country. If you lived outside the USA for a while you will know that the USA spread some crazy propoganda that this "street paved with gold" country. However, if you know of any immigrants in the USA. You know they are treated as second class citizens and must struggle to survive. A few succeed and live the "American Dream," but most don't.
But the US has its own selfish reasons to ensure the "American Dream" propoganda is spread worldwide, to ensure a steady stream of people come to its shore each year. To ensure cheap labor, and ensure our population does not shrink.
The USA also succeeded within 200 years because is stole, killed, and lied much better than any other nation within that time frame. We nearly wipe out the native american. We acted with serious moral disreguard during the Cold War. And we have broken more treaties than any other nation on the planet.
As if the USA is civilized. We have arrested naturalized americans of middle-east descent without just cause. We have treated blacks in our history worst than any other nation. Do you remember the WTO riot in Seattle 1999, what happen to our civil right and the 1st admendment that day.
I too saw that CNBC report. Not only did they focus on Shanghai, it focused on Beijing, and some chicken and cabbage farmers. As with official CCP reports, it basically reaffirms China is still developing. However, it also reaffirms the CCP belief the China is developing at an extremely fast pace. Did you see those stats during the commercial break. China attracted 67.9 billion US dollars in foriegn investments, which is greater than Brazil by 3 times. China is the largest consumer market for cell phone. China is the 4th largest manufacturing country, behind USA, Japan and Germany. Wake up and smell the coffee.
No one is here to accuse you of anything. We already know your lily-white on the inside.
So what does your ranting have to do with Taiwan. Or are you here just to put down the PRC to compensate for you own failings in life
AC Dropout   
Monday, December 02, 2002 at 09:20:35 (PST)
   [24.136.115.189]
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|