A few days ago, Chinese-language newspaper the Want Daily published a suggestion for democratic cross-strait unification that received a great deal of attention on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
A more comprehensive way of putting the aim of this proposal is: “democratic and peaceful cross-strait unification,” because, for the two sides to be united, China would first have to be democratized, and friendly and peaceful terms established across the Strait. Once these conditions are met, the Taiwanese public would have to agree to unification via a democratic procedure.
Democracy should be the guiding principle determining the nature of cross-strait relations. Attaining a Taiwanese consensus reaching above and beyond the unification-or-independence issue is the only solution. So long as Taiwanese agree on it, unification remains a possible outcome of cross-strait developments.
The development of cross-strait relations is an open process, and unification and independence are not in opposition to each other: As long as it is reached via democratic, peaceful means, the result of this process — including unification — would be acceptable to Taiwanese.
On Feb. 14, 2006, the pro-unification Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) published an advertisement in Chinese-language daily the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) saying that “any decision that changes the current status of the Republic of China [ROC] should be agreed to by the people of Taiwan … based on the spirit of democracy, there are several possible options for Taiwan’s future [and whichever is chosen] should be decided by the public, whether it be unification, independence or maintaining the status quo.”
In its Resolution on Taiwan’s Future, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which supports independence, says: “Any change in the independent ‘status quo’ must be decided by all residents of Taiwan in a referendum.”
In May 2013, then-DPP chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) confirmed that the Resolution on Taiwan’s Future remains part the DPP’s cross-strait policy.
In his inauguration speech in May 2000, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) said that the cross-strait issue should be handled based on democratic principles, adding that: “[W]hile upholding the principles of democracy and parity, building upon the existing foundations, and constructing conditions for cooperation through goodwill, we believe that the leaders on both sides possess enough wisdom and creativity to jointly deal with the question of a future ‘one China.’”
In his re-election speech in May 2004, Chen said: “Taiwan is a completely free and democratic society. Neither a single individual nor political party can make the ultimate choice for the public. If both sides are willing, on the basis of goodwill, to create an environment engendered upon peaceful development and freedom of choice, then in the future, the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China — or Taiwan and China — can seek to establish relations in any form whatsoever. We would not exclude any possibility, so long as it has the consent of the 23 million people of Taiwan.”
In other words, the future of cross-strait relations is an open affair: As long as the agreement of 23 million Taiwanese is obtained in a peaceful and autonomous manner, Taiwan could accept any kind of cross-strait political relationship.
If China wants unification, it should persuade Taiwanese using real benefits and civilized values in a democratic and peaceful process. The result would likely be beneficial and prosperous for both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Both governments should make the happiness of both nations’ populaces their ultimate goal as they consider pragmatic solutions for cross-strait issues and avoid getting caught in the ideological bog of unification or independence.
An even more important issue is the promotion of democracy in China, which is a prerequisite for providing a possibility to resolve the cross-strait issue and the differing values that are the cause of bilateral conflicts over sovereignty. The result would be that Taiwan’s democracy would no longer be the focal point of cross-strait conflict; rather, it would become an asset in the development of bilateral ties.
Although Taiwan’s democracy is not perfect, it is a positive example for China to follow and could well become a key influence. Taiwan’s democratic example and its ability to be a catalyst for Chinese democratization cannot be replaced by Hong Kong or any other actor. From this point of view, Taiwan is a strategic international asset that can promote Chinese democracy and peaceful growth, and as such, should receive the attention and protection of the international community.
Using the word “democratic” to modify the term “unification” is in line with Taiwan’s fundamental values and interests, and it would also give China hope that unification might occur. In addition, it could turn unification into an active force for initiating Chinese democracy. Taiwan could say it would only discuss democratic and peaceful unification with a popularly elected Chinese government. Only if Beijing implements democracy could it and Taipei form a council for democratic, peaceful unification in which they could discuss the contents of that union and methods for bringing it about.
Democratization would boost China’s economic sustainability and harmonious social development, and would also benefit cross-strait unification. This view must win greater support among the Chinese public so lasting peace across the Taiwan Strait can be promoted.
Tung Chen-yuan is a professor at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of Development Studies.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.