In a speech marking the 30th anniversary of a message to “compatriots in Taiwan,” Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), with his trademark unctuousness, on Wednesday called for unification and that Taiwanese independence forces “clearly understand the situation and stop secessionist activities.”
We suggest that this despot pause for a moment and strive for some clear understanding of his own.
He could make a splendid start by looking at the latest survey of Taiwanese opinion on cross-strait relations published by CommonWealth magazine, a periodical whose editorial line over the years has generally supported the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
When asked what the optimal relationship between Taiwan and “the mainland” was, 23.5 percent of respondents said Taiwan should immediately or eventually achieve independence, while a mere 6.5 percent said they wanted immediate or conditional unification with China. A total of 57.8 percent said they wanted Taiwan to stick with the “status quo.”
Hu and other advocates of unification may dismiss the CommonWealth report as just another survey, but as one of an annual series conducted by the magazine it takes on some significance.
This year’s percentage of people wanting immediate or eventual independence is the highest since the survey began in 1994. Likewise, the percentage of people wanting immediate or conditional unification is the lowest since the survey started.
One thing is certain: Despite the efforts of KMT think tank staffers and their political machine, Taiwanese consciousness is rising.
Another question in the survey asked: “Are you proud to be Taiwanese?” A total of 79.5 percent answered “yes,” while 11.9 percent answered “no.”
This is the mainstream public opinion that Hu misrepresents as the rumblings of a radical minority. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) must be aware of this, so it is intriguing to speculate on what it thinks it can achieve by patronizing millions of people.
Such mainstream opinion has the capacity to act as a backbone for a government committed to Taiwan’s sovereignty. It is therefore disappointing — but illuminating — to note that the KMT government is not making use of it.
“As long as the ‘one China’ principle is recognized by both sides ... we can discuss anything ...We can have realistic negotiations to reach a reasonable approach for the issue of Taiwan participating in the activities of international organizations as long as it is not on the premise of two Chinas, or one China, one Taiwan,” Hu said in his speech on Wednesday.
The fate of any “realistic negotiations,” however, looks uncertain given that nowhere in his speech did Hu acknowledge President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) key principle of “mutual non-denial” of sovereignty.
Yet the Ma government continues to glad-hand Beijing. In its response yesterday, the Presidential Office trotted out more talk of “mutual non-denial” despite Hu’s remarks serving as another slap in the face for Ma’s attempts to find common ground.
It is perfectly understandable that Hu and the CCP refuse to acknowledge the real situation in Taiwan.
But it borders on unforgivable that Taiwan’s president can defy mainstream opinion and fall in line with China’s nonsense with nary a complaint.
Ma Ying-jeou as an individual is more than entitled to do so. But as a president he stands at risk of, and risks standing condemned for, dragging every Taiwanese down with him.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS