Former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) statement to a Deutsche Welle reporter that the cross-strait relationship was a state-to-state relationship or a special state-to-state relationship may have been legally flawed, but his aim and logic were abundantly clear.
When President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) drew parallels between the two Germanys and the cross-strait situation when speaking to German visitors, he had no idea what he was talking about.
After its defeat in World War II, Germany was occupied by the Allied forces and its division was forced to accommodate the US and Russia, making it a prototypical divided country.
Taiwan, on the other hand, was ceded by the Qing Empire to Japan, which Tokyo later renounced in the San Francisco Peace Treaty. Legally speaking, Taiwan did not belong to China and so it stands to reason that it never seceded from it.
Since there are both fundamental legal and factual differences, the only useful example Taiwan can extract from the German experience is that the two Germanys coexisted peacefully as two sovereign states and that both joined the UN, although they maintained a special state-to-state relationship.
From this perspective, Lee’s special state-to-state dictum is actually a concession because it implies that there are two Chinas and that there is a possibility that the two in the future will merge into one China through peaceful means.
However, Lee’s pragmatic view had been criticized by both China and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) for creating an “independent Taiwan” and “Taiwanese independence.”
The KMT does not recognize that Taiwan is an independent and sovereign state, nor does it promote the view that the relationship between Taiwan and China is a special state-to-state relationship.
That only leaves the unification part of the German comparison, but that part is unacceptable to Taiwan.
The German division was forced and the communist government in East Germany was supported by the Soviet Union which did not want unification.
This problem was not resolved until the weakening of the Soviet Union toward the end of the 1980s, when the East German public voted to join democratic West Germany and return to one united Germany.
The two sides of the Taiwan Strait differ tremendously in both territorial and population size.
In addition, the Chinese communist state aims to annex democratic Taiwan. This is the exact opposite of the situation in East Germany, where the population was only too happy to accept the West German democratic system.
However, even if the Chinese authoritarian system were to collapse, the Chinese people would not likely hold a referendum to join democratic Taiwan.
And even if they were, we have already seen how the incompetent KMT government would be unable to rule such a country.
Ma does not promote the view that Taiwan is a sovereign state, nor does he dare promote the view that the cross-strait relationship is a special state-to-state relationship.
Instead, he accepts the “one China” principle and promotes eventual unification.
Empty talk about the experience of the two Germanys only reinforces the impression that he is supporting China’s ambitions to annex Taiwan and incorporate it into China’s bastardized communist system.
James Wang is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
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,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
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
RSS