When it comes to “one country, two systems,” most people might think that it is exclusively for China’s special administrative regions such as Hong Kong and Macau, but the policy was initiated in the 1980s under Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), and it was originally designed for Taiwan.
Leaders of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have regarded the Taiwan issue as a core Chinese interest, and almost every leader has had their own ideas and statements about Taiwan.
During Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) rule, the strategy was to use the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to “liberate” Taiwan. Therefore, frequent military conflicts occurred in the Taiwan Strait from the 1940s to the 1960s, such as the Battle of Guningtou and the 823 Kinmen Artillery Battle.
However, the day right after the latter battle, the PRC released its “Message to Compatriots in Taiwan,” which basically requested that Taiwan join the fight against “American imperialism.” The statement indicated that Mao’s policy toward Taiwan had changed.
In the Deng era, the situation underwent a qualitative change.
Deng introduced “one country, two systems” along the basis of the “One Program and Four Compendiums” of former Chinese premier Zhou Enlai (周恩來).
From “liberating” Taiwan to peaceful unification, the policy for Taiwan has changed significantly from Mao until now.
Former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民), the PRC’s fourth leader, made his “Eight Points” the main theme of his plan for Taiwan. The idea was to “keep fighting for the unification of the country” in the 1990s, emphasizing that under Beijing’s “one China” principle, all issues could be discussed.
His successor, Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), also had his own argument, “Hu’s Six Points,” which emphasized political mutual trust.
Along with the “one China” principle, another highlight was formally ending the state of hostility between the two sides, aiming to reach a peaceful agreement and build a framework for the peaceful development of cross-strait relations.
Hu was renowned as the most “friendly” PRC leader regarding Taiwan policy, but the cornerstone remained “one country, two systems.”
Then there is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). In January, he said that “peaceful unification and ‘one country, two systems’ are the best ways to achieve national unification” in a ceremony commemorating the 40th anniversary of the “Message to Taiwan Compatriots.”
In short, it is still “one country, two systems,” but with insincere hypocrisy.
The “one country, two systems” policy has been implemented in Hong Kong for 22 years, but still is not a fit. The protests have lasted for three months; people are striving for their basic rights. The main of the five major requests by Hong Kong protesters is to practice “true universal suffrage.”
The original purpose of the Sino-British Joint Declaration was to maintain a capitalist system and lifestyle in Hong Kong. The second article of the Basic Law of Hong Kong also specifies that people in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region should enjoy a high degree of autonomy, administration, legislation, justice and final adjudication, but all these rights are fading away.
Less than halfway into the 50 years that Hong Kong was to remain semi-autonomous, the “one country, two systems” model is regarded as a “myth” by the PRC, and is collapsing day by day.
Certainly, there is no perfect system for Hong Kong at this point. However, when the PRC runs its “one country, two systems” propaganda, its ignorance and arrogance are the most objectionable and unacceptable attitude to people in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
The situation and condition in Taiwan are more complex than in Hong Kong. People do not know why the PRC is so confident and insist that “one country, two systems” is the best solution for Taiwan.
The 70th anniversary of the foundation of the PRC would have been the best timing for Beijing to sell “one country, two systems,” but ironically, the protests in Hong Kong are continuing. Let us see how the PRC now plans to sell its “beautiful” “one country, two systems” model.
Pan Jia-hong is a postgraduate student researching Chinese Communist Party history and Chinese People’s Liberation Army military development.
Sometimes When there is a choice to be made, none of the options are good. The choice between hooking up with communism — in its Chinese iteration, the one that bugs Taiwan the most — and neofascism, of the back-to-the-roots Italian variety or any other kind, is such a choice. The good news is that Taiwan does not have to choose. It neither needs to cozy up to China — the successes of President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration, despite its shortcomings, are evidence of that — nor does it need to embrace Italy under its likely new leader, Italian lawmaker Giorgia
China has quietly unloaded 10 percent, or US$100 billion, of its US Treasury holdings in the first half of the year. During the past 40 years of rapid economic growth after recovering from a quasi-ruined state that officially ended in 1976, China has amassed a huge pile of foreign reserves partially through its trade surplus. The US Treasuries have always been the prime choice for China to park its foreign reserves. What made it run away from the traditional safe haven for its hard-earned foreign reserves? One explanation is that Beijing is leveraging its financial power as the second-largest US Treasury
For many years, the military’s defense of the Taiwan Strait has been centered around the doctrine of establishing “air and maritime supremacy and repulsing landing forces.” However, after the legislature passed the Sea-Air Combat Power Improvement Plan Purchase Special Regulation (海空戰力提升計畫採購特別條例) last year, the doctrine was altered to “air defense, counterattack, and establish air and maritime supremacy,” with repelling landing forces removed from the equation. Despite the changes to the defense doctrine, landing operations and anti-landing operations still feature at the core of the military’s plans for the defense of the nation. The primary reason that peace in the Taiwan Strait has prevailed
In a China-US war over Taiwan, paradoxically the greatest loss of life could be inflicted on the Muslim Uighurs. Uighurs constitute 45 percent of the Xinjiang population of 25 million people, with over 1 million incarcerated in internment camps in accordance with a policy initiated under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Another half-million children have been placed in state-run boarding schools. Forced sterilization has led to a 24 to 60 percent drop in the birthrate, leading officials from many countries to describe the mass detention as genocide. Estimated annual death rates in the camps of between 5 and 10 percent could
RSS