President Chen Shui-bian (
I would like to suggest that Chen go one step further. He could ask the Chinese people to sponsor the following opinion polls:
First, should Beijing allow referendums in China? China claims that it is against only Chen's referendum. But does China support the democratic procedure of referendums? Premier Hu Jintao (
Second, do the Chinese people want to kill their son or daughter in an attack on Taiwan? The "one child" policy has limited the ability of Chinese families to expand. Do they really want to take the risk of losing their precious offspring in an attack on Taiwan? Let's have a referendum on whether the Chinese people want to die to retake Taiwan.
Third, how about a poll on reunification? There was a report that students at Beijing University wanted to ask their fellow Chinese whether or not they wanted to reunite with Taiwan. This proposal was quickly squashed. But why? Do the Chinese really want to absorb Taiwan into their new empire? How many really care about Taiwan? Let's ask some Tibetans, some Uighurs, some Hmong, some very rich people in Shanghai and Tientsin.
Four, what is the Chinese perception of the value for Taiwan to be united with China? We could ask several questions. Would the quality of life in Taiwan improve if it was part of China? (By the way, we would need to educate the Chinese about the meaning of the term "quality of life.") Would the income of the Taiwanese be improved? Would the Taiwanese have more freedom of speech, voting, religious expression? If nationalism is the only reason to reunify, what would the Chinese be willing to sacrifice for nationalism? Their environment? Their health? Their lives in a war with Taiwan? Last year I traveled on a moped in the hills around Hsinchu. As I puttered through little villages and ate at small restaurants, I tried to visualize how annexation by China would benefit these people's lives. I could think of nothing. Would either the Chinese in China or the Taiwanese really want to create another level of bureaucracy -- ie, Beijing -- to negotiate their happiness, welfare, economic activities, travel, religious rites and legal system? What type of person in Beijing would want to be posted in Taiwan to oversee the lives, livelihoods and living conditions of the Taiwanese?
Five, do people in Fujian want missiles aimed at Taiwan on their shore? Is the entire policy of uniting Taiwan with China nothing more than a prop for the military? Let's take this mobilization of wealth, people, militaristic policies, international threats away from the military. Who would benefit? The possibility of democracy? The daily lives of the Chinese people?
Six, what province would want to have the military building missiles on the their territory? Tibet? Xinjiang? What cities would want such missiles? Shanghai? Nanjing?
It is time, in the words of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), to have the Chinese people stand up. They should be given the opportunity to voice their concerns about China's aggressive and wasteful foreign policy toward Taiwan. They need to be educated about the consequences. They need to be asked their opinion. To use a variation on an old Chinese idiom: A long journey [to enlightenment] begins with a single thought.
Richard C. Kagan is professor of history at Hamline University.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS