The "one China" myth
It seems that some time ago a diplomat developed a simple solution to a complex problem. There were two governments each claiming to be the rightful ruler of China. Between the two, the ROC was at one time considered the legitimate government and then the US changed its mind and acknowl-edged the other government. The PRC became the official government of China. That left open an interesting and gray area -- is Taiwan, the territory still governed by the ROC, part of China?
While official US policy states that the US acknowl-edges that Taiwan is a part of China, the US insists that the issue be resolved peacefully. At the same time, the US discour-ages Taiwan from declaring independence.
This leads us to the issue of the divergence between reality and diplomatic talk. A diplomat may make every argument in the world that there is only one China, but that is like arguing that the sky is yellow. There are two Chinas. Or, more properly, one China, one Taiwan.
By every definition, Taiwan is an independent country. It has its own history, culture, military, government, economy and, unlike China, it is a demo-cracy. But because diplomats hate to make people angry (just ask Hitler), they give in to bullies. Therefore the Beijing bullies have made Taiwan the most isolated democracy in the world. If the US had been able to isolate Iraq as well as the Chinese have done with Taiwan, Saddam Hussein would surely have fallen by now.
Why should China get Tai-wan back? Historical ties are certainly not a factor. Taiwan has never been under the PRC's control; it was under Japanese control from the late 19th century until 1945. Otherwise, Britain could argue that the original 13 colonies are still part of the UK.
In reality, the US does treat Taiwan as a separate country. Several things show this. The US sells weapons to Taiwan based on the Taiwan Relations Act. Then there are the visas; Taiwanese have a much easier time getting visas than do the Chinese. Why? Taiwan is more developed. The Taiwanese, unlike the Chinese, are more likely to return and not overstay their visas. Regardless of what the US diplomats say, reality is another matter.
This brings us to the hypocrisy of the US. During the Cold War, the US did not say that West Germany and East Germany were Germany and there was only "one Germany." Taiwan and China were divided for similar reasons as East and West Germany, communist and non-communist.
China is only a bully today because US diplomats do not have the courage to stand up to them. US businesspeople have illusions about fortunes to be earned in China.
It is appalling that we are so hypocritical as to tell a democracy that they can not be free from a country known for its lack of human rights and its military ambitions. Writers of the Declaration of Independence would be appalled, as they decided freedom was important enough for them to take on a superpower.
I implore the American people to end the hypocrisy of "one China" and replace it with "one China, one Taiwan." Could this lead to war? Of course. Freedom is never free.
To quote US president Franklin Roosevelt, "We, and all others who believe in freedom as deeply as we do, would rather die on our feet than live on our knees."
Are we to believe we were willing to defend Western Europe's freedom at any cost yet turn our back on Asia? The only way to prevent aggression is to counter it before it acts.
If we declare Taiwan free, and make a treaty with it before China can react, it would be better than waiting for Beijing to attack first before being forced into a major war. If China gets Taiwan back, the US will lose a reliable ally in Asia and China will have replaced the US in Asia.
So I say, "one China, one Taiwan." Let us speak what the reality is. And if the people of Taiwan eventually want to reunite into a "one China," that is for them to decide.
Stephen Marler
Oviedo, Florida
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS