Print

Mail

wiki links

LETTERS: Unity through independence

In the wake of the recent crackdown in Tibet, which preceded Taiwan’s presidential election, feelings of uncertainty shrouded the people of Taiwan regarding the issue of future cross-strait relations.

With the KMT now in power after eight years of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) rule, the thought (or perhaps fear) of unification does not seem so distant. Yet, a lack of understanding could present a barrier for progress in solving the cross-strait issue.

The future of Taiwan, whether unification with China or formal independence, should be decided by Taiwanese.

Taiwanese are distraught each year to find proposals to be considered a “region” of 23 million people in a conventional sense continues to be denied. But we all know this travesty is a result of China’s inferiority complex and the Western powers’ desire for economic access to China.

Yet, perhaps letting go of “Taiwan” may exactly be the key for Taiwan to see China as a true motherland.

I hate to say it, but Taiwanese just do not have a strong attachment to China. Period.

Perhaps the descendants of the KMT do, although they make up about 13 percent of the population.

Despite the proximity of the two states, constant threats from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has further distanced the two. Having spoken to many Chinese regarding this sensitive issue at a world-class university, they simply do not comprehend why Taiwan is seeking independence.

Why are Taiwanese seeking independence when most Taiwanese are ethnically Chinese? The puzzle within the dilemma that baffles our understanding of cross-strait identity has been identified.

“Modern” international norms do not define a state to be ethnically homogeneous or amalgamated. If the people of Taiwan lack an attachment to the PRC, then what good is it to force unification?

Unfortunately, there is a preconceived notion or perhaps even an obsession within the PRC that countries with a ethnic Chinese majority should merge with the motherland to form a supreme nation. Yet this comes at the price of abolishing self-determination and sovereignty.

The existing domestic social turmoil that can’t be contained even with a monopolistic state-run media should be more than enough to caution the PRC against engulfing further chaos.

Why not form a “Chinese Union” with several sovereign states? Why not psychologically examine the consequences of Taiwanese independence rather than deciphering the political aftermath? After all, Taiwan is the only sovereign state that the PRC claims to have jurisdiction over.

While recognizing an independent Taiwan may lead to a domino effect of turmoil in Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet and Qinhai, it may actually be favorable to the PRC.

An independent Taiwan could follow mutual cooperation on social, economic and political issues which will gradually help establish Taiwanese trust in the PRC.

The current deadlock of tension and uncertainty can easily be traded for a newfound respect for a great nation that has decided to wisely give Taiwan what it deserves.

Independence would certainly create a path for a sustainable future and only then could we truly develop an attachment for China.

China needs to improve its global image as the taint has only been overlooked for the benefits of investment.

Yet, considering all reason and cost-benefit analyses, the current rationale for the PRC’s stance toward Taiwan is simply not to lose face.

Kenta Hayashi

Ann Arbor, Michigan
This story has been viewed 1206 times.