The China problem is a leftover from World War II, with the issues arising as the Republic of China (ROC) government occupied the nation after having accepted the surrender of the Japanese forces in Taiwan on behalf of the Allied forces.
In 1949, the ROC was overturned and replaced by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The People’s Republic of China (PRC) wanted to deal with what it saw as the remnants of China that remained outside of the PRC’s borders and the capture of the ROC has been its goal for well over half a century. It is this aim that is the basis of instability.
This issue is not only creating difficulties for Taiwan, it is also creating difficulties for the PRC, which is the representative of China.
This is causing problems for Taiwan’s democratic development and its road toward nationhood, and it is making it impossible for the PRC to become truly independent.
As a result, Taiwan and China have been unable to establish normal relations.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has used this “Chinese knot” to hijack Taiwan, but the CCP, with its “liberation theory,” has also been unable to untie the knot.
Taiwan, which was ceded by the Qing Empire to Japan, which ruled Taiwan for 50 years, has been separated from China for more than 120 years and even though the KMT has seen the land as a basis for the party’s revival after defeat in the Chinese Civil War, more than half a century of KMT rule has only resulted in the public becoming resentful of China.
The PRC wants to take over the ROC to complete the construction of a “new China,” which has made Taiwan a constant target for annexation. Although cross-strait economic relations have been close since China’s reform and opening up, Beijing’s ambitions to invade Taiwan have not diminished.
A look at history shows that there has been talk about helping liberate the Taiwanese from the KMT and the ROC, but a comparison with today’s situation highlights the malicious intent of great powers.
Taiwan has already cast off KMT rule and is now moving toward becoming a small, independent nation that has no claims on China.
Although many Taiwanese have ancestors from China, their descendants born and raised in Taiwan are not strictly Han Chinese, they have also developed their own history, independently of China.
Mutual respect and parallel development has been the norm in the modern world.
Military confrontation and meaningless waste of resources should come to an end in the name of peace and friendship.
This is also necessary if China is to become a respected power.
Following the election of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) in 1996, there have been two popularly elected presidents who both served two terms each: former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), who was elected in 2000 and then re-elected in 2004, and Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who won the presidential election in 2008 and then again in 2012.
Ma’s eight years — during which he restored the KMT government to power — are about to come to an end and president-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is to take over on May 20.
Taiwanese have already made their view of the “status quo” known, discarding the KMT’s party-state ideology and pro-China stance.
The establishment of two nations, one on each side of the Taiwan Strait, will put an end to historical enmity and provide a historical opportunity for a new friendship.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Perry Svensson
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS