Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Sometimes the truth hurts

Relations between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have been cloudy since 1950, with both sides claiming sovereignty over the other, while in reality neither side controls the other's jurisdiction. Both sides have fought over representation at international organizations and events, but to do this they have used complicated, almost incomprehensible language, leaving outsiders totally bewildered about cross-strait relations. In 1999, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) redefined cross-strait relations as "special state-to-state" in nature. President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) remarks that the two sides of the Strait are "one country on each side" was a clear statement of reality.

The fuzziness of the cross-strait relationship is due in part to its complexity. Obsessed with its erstwhile rule over China, the KMT government stressed its claim to sovereignty over the mainland, thereby reinforcing Beijing's "one China" propaganda. The fuzziness is also due to the hypocrisy that defines so much of international relations. The ROC was established in 1912, the PRC was established in 1949. Both are independent states holding competing sovereignty claims. These are all undeniable historical facts. The PRC joined the UN in 1971, replacing the ROC, but the latter not only continued to exist, it developed Taiwan into an economic powerhouse. Taiwan held its first direct presidential elections in 1996 and saw its first peaceful transition of political power in 2000.

Chen's speech on Saturday has nothing to do with Taiwan moving toward independence. He simply put an end to an era of ambiguity in cross-strait relations in order to establish a foundation for negotiations on direct links.

The timing of Chen's clarification can be attributed to three things. First, it was aimed at countering China's continuing efforts to isolate Taiwan diplomatically as demonstrated by its seduction of Nauru. Second, it reflects Washington's discarding of its strategic ambiguity on the military front as a result of China's military expansion. US military objectives have become increasingly clear -- from sending aircraft carriers to the seas near Taiwan during the 1996 missile crisis, to the inclusion of "peripheral areas" in the US-Japan security treaty, to President George W. Bush's statement that the US would do whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend itself. Third, with China preparing for leadership transition, the various factions in Beijing must be very careful in their handling of the Taiwan issue.

Chen has also laid down his Taiwan card. The international community is keeping a close eye on Chen's intentions about "one country on each side." China is planning diplomatic, economic and military sanctions against Taiwan. An escalation of tensions on diplomatic, military, trade and media fronts will be inevitable. Taiwan needs to be prepared for a crisis similar to that of 1996.

Premier Yu Shyi-kun will stop over in the US today as he heads for Central America. His trip will provide a good opportunity to attract international media attention and explain Taiwan's position. Mainland Affairs Council Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is accompanying and will be giving policy briefings on the trip. The government should also be explaining to Taiwan's allies that Chen's speech did not herald a policy shift and seek support from them.

Speaking the truth is a virtue, but sometimes the truth hurts. Lee said his administration prepared 18 scripts to handle different scenarios during the 1996 crisis. The government's national security institutions should be equally prepared to handle any provocations from a China that has never been able to handle the truth.
This story has been viewed 7354 times.