President Chen Shui-bian's (
The so-called "negative" reactions stem not from the decision itself, but from the international community's concern that China may react in an "unreasonable manner" and endanger world peace. Such concern has been most evident in the US, Europe and other Western nations.
The reports by the quasi- official Voice of America (VOA), which misquoted Taiwanese officials on the issue, added to the misunderstanding and further complicated the problem. This highlights the need for better negotiations between Taiwan and Western nations to sort out contradictions based on their common, strategic benefits.
Even though the negotiations cannot be held based on the principle of equality given Taiwan's unique position in the international community, they should be carried out based on the principle of mutual respect.
But what clearly needs to be sorted out here is that Taiwan is not what China calls a "troublemaker;" instead, it is the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) that is causing the trouble.
Let us put aside China's incessant opposition to any political or economic ideas expressed by democratic nations and restrict ourselves to looking at cross-strait relations. Taiwan's abolition of the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of Communist Rebellion in 1990 in practice marked the end of cross-strait hostilities.
Nevertheless, China continues to resort to military threats to achieve its goal of unification. Shouldn't the Taiwanese take action to oppose China's behavior? What Taiwan is doing is simply using peaceful means to preserve its sovereignty. If Taiwanese are denied this right, then what does the UN Declaration of Human Rights stand for?
Apart from the West, some countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America have not been particularly "friendly" to Taiwan owing to pressure from China. Russia has been the most vocal in opposing Taiwan. Its foreign ministry recently issued a statement saying that "the decision made by Taiwanese leaders [to terminate the council] is not conducive to regional peace and stability."
What is interesting is that it is Russia's arms sales to China that have prompted the Beijing government to expand the scale of its military drills in recent years. What's more, both Russia and China launched a joint military exercise last year in response to the joint US-Taiwan and US-Japan military drills. It takes a lot of effrontery on Russia's part to now accuse Taiwan of jeopardizing peace in the region.
The negative response notwithstanding, Taiwan has made itself heard in the international community because of this controversy. Quite a number of international media outlets such as the New York Times have had extensive coverage of the incident. Although US-Taiwan relations appeared tense for a period, there are also indications that the issue relating to Taiwan's sovereignty can no longer be ignored and suppressed. It is also necessary for both the US and China to review their Taiwan policies, which have been so disrespectful of Taiwanese public opinion in the past.
In China, some Web surfers have even asked why -- if the council and its guidelines were so important -- no one had mentioned them before. Clearly, more and more Chinese are able to see through how Beijing manipulates the issue relating to independence and unification.
Paul Lin is a New York-based political commentator.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti and Daniel Cheng
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
RSS