In a recent interview with an international media organization, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) restated that his goal in cross-strait relations was to sign a peace agreement with Beijing before 2012. He based the agreement on the precondition that Taiwan would not seek independence and China would not attack Taiwan.
Such an agreement is no different from defining cross-strait relations as domestic.
In legal terms, this would not be a peace agreement signed by two states on an equal footing, but rather a domestic ceasefire agreement within the framework of the civil war between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). To be blunt, it could also be called a surrender by the KMT. Ma said during the interview that cross-strait hostilities have not yet ceased; therefore it was obvious that he wants to handle cross-strait relations within the KMT-CCP Civil War framework.
Not seeking independence amounts to recognizing China's claim that Taiwan is part of its territory. But if Taiwan is not an independent nation, then why do we have an elected president and public representatives? What would be Ma's qualification for running for the office of president? Ma's stated goal clearly infringes on the people's right to self-determination and rejects the sovereignty of his own country. If Ma were to implement his cross-strait policy, he would clearly meet the requirements for committing an act of treason.
Ma's talk about not seeking independence echoes China's mantra of opposition to de jure Taiwan independence. In fact, de jure independence is merely an empty phrase defined by China as a means to justify the use of military force against Taiwan, to interfere in Taiwan's internal affairs and to use as a bargaining chip when dealing with the US.
In fact, de jure Taiwan independence is evolving everyday. For example, does Taiwan's issuance of new national identification cards include the 1.3 billion Chinese people? And travelers holding passports issued by the Taiwanese government are traveling around the world everyday, while every foreigner entering Taiwan is required to obtain a visa issued by the Taiwanese authorities.
On top of that, verdicts issued by courts in the US, Germany, Italy and many other countries do not treat international treaties signed by China as binding on Taiwan -- in other words, Taiwan is not part of China's territory. These legal actions are based on the precondition that Taiwan is a country.
If, as China claims, de jure Taiwanese independence is a valid pretext for China to take military action against Taiwan, China would have done so long ago. China only wants to monopolize the right to define the meaning of "de jure Taiwan independence" to be able to use the threat of military force as a means for intervening in Taiwan's constitutional reform, national referendums, democratic development and other domestic Taiwanese issues, and to blocking other countries and international organizations from recognizing Taiwan's status.
Most importantly, Ma's proposal in fact works in concert with China's "Anti-Secession" Law and indicates that Taiwan's government is willing to accept the conditions stipulated in the law for resorting to "non-peaceful means to stop Taiwan's secession from China." This deprives the people of Taiwan of their right to self-determination, which is enshrined in the UN's Human Rights Convention.
Vincent Wang is an attorney-at-law.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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