President Chen Shui-bian's (
The Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) recent ad in the Liberty Times, the Taipei Times' sister paper, declared that the public have the option to choose independence for Taiwan, unification with China or to maintain the status quo. Although KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Similarly, when Chen declared that the NUC and the national unification guidelines will cease to function, he also eliminated a preconceived idea, determined for the public by the previous KMT government. This is a manifestation of the democratic spirit. The change is only a recognition of possibilities that may lead to changes in the future -- there is no need for the international community to fret over the matter.
There is certainly a degree of conflict between Chen's announcement that the NUC and the guidelines will cease to function and the "four noes" he outlined in his inauguration speeches in 2000 and 2004, and that hurts his credibility. In both speeches, however, Chen stressed that his promise was made on the condition that China renounce the use of force against Taiwan -- a fact that has often been ignored. As China aims an increasing number of missiles at Taiwan, the premise on which the "four noes" were predicated has ceased to exist. Still, the US and the international community continue to ignore China's ongoing changes to the "status quo," preferring instead to place Taiwan's actions under the microscope. This is entirely unreasonable.
Beijing has frequently criticized Chen's intentions to abolish the NUC and the guidelines, despite doing nothing to achieve the goals they outline: cross-strait exchanges and, eventually, direct links. Instead, Beijing works constantly to isolate Taiwan in the international community, repeatedly blocks its bids to enter the World Health Organization and has passed the "Anti-Secession" Law. These actions cause only resentment in Taiwan -- China has done nothing to bring the two sides closer together. When the Taiwanese government was willing to discuss cross-strait flights and tourism, Beijing refused to negotiate.
In truth, China has never cared about the guidelines, for it wants only unconditional surrender. Taiwan, however, refuses to surrender and has now rejected the unification guidelines, causing China to lose face -- the real source of Beijing's displeasure.
By announcing that the NUC and the guidelines will "cease to function," rather than be "abolished," Chen has tried to achieve a political compromise. The president has moved in the right direction, but the timing is unfortunate. The right time to make the announcement would have been during his 2000 inauguration.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic