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
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
Former Japanese minister of defense Shigeru Ishiba has been elected as president of the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and would be approved as prime minister in parliament today. Ishiba is a familiar face for Taiwanese, as he has visited the nation several times. His popularity among Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers has grown as a result of his multiple meetings and encounters with legislators and prominent figures in the government. The DPP and the LDP have close ties and have long maintained warm relations. Ishiba in August 2020 praised Taiwan’s
On Thursday last week, the International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a well-researched report titled “The Widening Schism across the Taiwan Strait,” which focused on rising tensions between Taiwan and China, making a number of recommendations on how to avoid conflict. While it is of course laudable that a respected international organization such as the ICG is willing to think through possible avenues toward a peaceful resolution, the report contains a couple of fundamental flaws in the way it approaches the issue. First, it attempts to present a “balanced approach” by pushing back equally against Taiwan’s perceived transgressions as against Beijing’s military threats
RSS