Taiwan: independence/(re)unification/status quo/referendum?


#1

Taiwan: independence/reunification or...

  • Taiwan is a province of China, whose legitimate government is the PRC, and should reunify as soon as possible.
  • Taiwan part of China, but the PRC are usurpers. The ROC should reconquer the Mainland.
  • Taiwan should unify with China once China reforms to become a free democratic country.
  • Taiwan should negotiate with China to have a close relationship, but with as many freedoms as can be agreed upon.
  • Taiwan should seek to maintain the status quo as long as possible.
  • Taiwan is effectively independent, but China prevents this from being formalised. Taiwan should try to slowly and carefully move towards de jure independence.
  • Taiwan should declare independence now.
  • Taiwan should bide its time until the circumstances allow for a referendum for Taiwanese to determine their future.

0voters

This topic comes up a lot on this forum.

Most recently we've been discussing it in [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/taiwan-independence-reunification-self-determination/2146/1 thread[/url]. But that thread was started in 2002. Things have changed, as have peoples' opinions. Also that thread was going well off-topic.

And [url=http://tw.forumosa.com/t/dpp-and-independence/15426/1 one[/url] discusses the independence policy of the DPP.

I think it will be interesting to discuss the wider possibilities than a simple independence vs unfication scenraio. What are the other options?

If you don't like the idea of unification with China, is that just becuase China is a communist country? What if China reformed and became democratic. Would you then like Taiwan to unify with China, maybe 30 years down the line? Personally, I'd like to see Taiwan remain independent even then, but think that it would have to be up to the people of Taiwan to vote in a free poll. Or should the people of China also get a say?

If you support Taiwan Independence (TI), do you think Taiwan should declare independence now? Or do you think the threat of China attacking is real and not to be ignored? If these are your reasons for opposing TI, would you like to see Taiwan independent if the situation changed and there would be no repurcussions? That's my view - independence when possible, but folly to declare it now.

So, I've revamped the poll. Results of the previous poll were:
Which do you support?
Taiwan Independence: 29% (23)
Reunification with the Mainland: 13% (11)
Self-determination (No matter what the outcome): 56% (45)


#2

Hey, nice comprehensive stab at a very slippery topic.

Yes. Then petition the United Nations for recognition under their Universal Declaration of Human Rights. See relevant section Part 1, Article 1

Yes. But that should have no bearing on question above or below

There will always be repercussions. Those repercussions should not deter the exercise of political self-determination. If people are afraid of fighting and dieing for political independence, their nation, then they do not deserve one. It is just that simple. Just say you're Chinese from (the province of) Taiwan and be done with it.

Delay in this matter greatly enhances China's position and the reunification of Taiwan.


#3

Honestly, I don't really understand the purpose of this poll. It is a given that most/nearly all of the posters here are strident Taidu supporters so why even bother with such a pedantic poll. Some will attempt to obfuscate the issue by cowardly dodging it by stating that they support some tenuous concept of "self-determination" but even that is actual doublespeak couched in a Taidu agenda. Unless of course your rationale is to out how many pro-unification posters secretly stalk this forum, I don't really see how this poll will be constructive. :s


#4

Uh-oh, wassamatta man, afraid of a little nuance?


#5

Why is it that you assume "self-determination" equals "Taiwan independence?" Just how is it that recognizing that the two could be different is cowardly? It seems to me that your disdain for self determination reveals your insecurity and fear that if Taiwanese were left to choose for themselves, they would choose to be officially separate from your lot on the other side of the strait. That that is even a possibility makes the blood of most mainlanders boil. How about you?

I voted for the ROC liberating the mainland from the communist bandits. After the liberation, Tongyong Pinyin will replace Hanyu Pinyin and sh-, zh-, ch- and -er will be eliminated from the national language, which will be called "Gouyi". The pictures of Mao at Tiananmen will be pulled down and replaced with those of LDH and CSB. All the Fuji film kiosks at tourist sites throughout the mainland, and especially those at Tiananmen Square, will be replaced by betelnut stalls (of course properly staffed). All the Beijing duck joints in Beijing will be torn down and replaced by stalls selling superior culinary treats such as stinky tofu, duck tongue, chicken ass and pig intestines. Actually, Beijing will no longer be called Beijing. It will revert to the title of Beiping since the capitol will move to Tainan, of course. The Great Hall of the People will truly become a great hall of the people when it is converted into the largest Holiday KTV in China. The Qingdao, Haerbin and other breweries with geographic names will be forced to change their names. Taiwan Beer will be the only label allowed to keep a geographic name in order to prevent anybody from thinking of declaring independence after a bender. A-mei and F-4 will be commissioned to create a national anthem for the new republic. And of course, Shanghai will be pushed into the ocean, residents, gawdy buildings and all.


#6

Actually, in the previous poll only 29% supported TI.

Funny. You equate self-determination with TI - 'don't let them vote, because thy'll surely pick TI'.

And then you say there's no point to this poll, as everyone will just pick TI.

If you think the case for unification is so strong, why do you assume that everyone will pick independence?

Brian


#7

Self-determination IS a lark to TI because to accept that the Taiwanese have a collective choice is to automatically assume they represent distinct unit within the Chinese body politic that has a choice regarding seccession. They do not.

Also, do not mistake me for a mainland shill argueing historical Chinese claims dating back to the Ming dynasty. I could care less about whatever historical validations exist justifying Chinese suzereignty over Taiwan beyond the fact that they exist. My concerns are not so much about the past, but about the present and the future of the Chinese state. It is in my opinion that the reunification of Taiwan will allow China to reap a windfall of benefits both political and strategic and it is vital in Chinese interests for either unification or a Finlandization of Taiwan. Taidu ideology is both an ideological and strategic threat to China, thus it must be resisted and ultimately destroyed. For me, beyond the emotional level, Taiwan is a matter of simple interests.

As for a case of reunification, I think I can field a fairly persuasive arguement when there are 20 PLA divisions stationed on Taiwan. I don't think anyone would be in much of a position to disagree.

p.s. Most of the people here ARE TI supporters. Keep denying that if you wish though.


#8

Why not? Do you mean to say that they don't have a choice? Or do you mean to say that Taiwan's status in Greater China is not distinct? I think you're wrong on every count.

I think that you are trolling. Tread carefully. :no-no: From the rules:


#9

I agree with your statement that the majority of people on Forumosa are TI supporters in some form or another. Even someone like me who believes that Taiwanese people are Chinese but yet believe they have the right to exercise their political rights such as voting, self-determination, etc. It's recognized as a universal human rights principle. That fact is played out all over the world where people fight and die for the right to self-determination and ultimately, nation-hood. So in a way, your equation of self-determination to independence isn't so off the mark.

I think Taiwan will eventually reunify...by voting with their investment dollars. China currently owns Taiwan as Taiwanese investment dollars continue to pour into Taiwan and Taiwanese businesses are expanding and protecting their stakes in coastal China. It's like this analogy, if you owe the bank $100,000, the bank owns you. If you owe the bank $100 mil dollars, you own the bank.

As for your support of a finlandization of the Taiwan issue, that's contrary to your position of reunification. Finlandization assumes sovereignty but that sovereignty comes with a price -- namely having a quid pro quo deal where in exchange for sovereignty, the country aligns itself with the dominant country politically, culturally, etc. China would never support a finlandization policy; it's an all position. Taiwan would be fortunate if it could negotiate a HK type solution. Furthermore, Taiwan is already within China's sphere of influence. It's the US-Japanese who have ratched up the stakes by its latest communique. If anything it's a show that Taiwan is a pawn in the Asia-Pac chess game.

It's a threat to Taiwan only. China has no fear of Taidu or similar threats. It's like Tibet. China has that under control. Its expansion of the SAR and its existing semi-autonomous region policies would be able to fit Taiwan however it develops.


#10

Not at all. Many would would say that they are not within the Chinese body politic at all.

It seems that your argument in favour of unification is that it would be good for China. That's kind of like saying Singapore should (re)unify with Malaysia, becasue it would be good for Malaysia (but forget what the people fo Singapore want).

Brian


#11

Singapore is not a good example. The Malaysians kick out Singapore from Malaysia of racist reasons. Malaysians want a pure Nation State for Malays. Singapore had too many Chinese and were unilaterally invited to leave Malaysia.

Unless you are suggesting that Taiwan is too Chinese for certain segment of the population on Taiwan.

Anyways throughout history Taiwan's future has been decided without the input of Taiwan. Just look to our allies like USA and Japan. They recently decided to declare security issues with little or no regards to the people of Taiwan. One minute they're talking about NK and the next minute they toss ROC in their speech. So if you are wondering in the future what ROC has anything to do with NK nuclear program, you can thank our special friends in Tokyo and Washington.

Best strike out on our own and deal with PRC directly in diplomatic situations, like the direct flights recently.

How valid is ROC unification or independence if it is decided by proxy in Washington and Tokyo?


#12

Fair enough. I didn't mean a literally analogous example.

I meant, using 'Taiwan unifying with China, would be good for China' (without caring what Taiwan thinks about this) is saying something like:

Singapore (smaller, more economically developed), should unify with Malaysia (larger, less developed) becuase it would be good for Malaysia, even if Singapore doesn't want that. This, on a hypothetical level, ignoring all hostorical and cultural factors.

Or how about, it would be like Australia unifying with Indonesia, because that would be good for Indonesia (who cares what the Aussies want).

Brian


#13

The point being there is a population on Taiwan which feel that unification or being friendly with PRC is an proper solution to the situation cannot be disregarded or dismissed.

A case in point is Australia and East Timor independence. After helping East Timor win their independence, Australia goes into dispute with East Timor over oil reserve rights in the ocean, knowing full well East Timor could not defend their rights in the dispute. Australia enter this dispute with East Timor knowing full well that one of the major reasons East Timor wanted independence was to develop their society from oil revenues.

Which is why Taiwan needs to take the lead in ROC future. To ensure Taiwan interest are forwarded first. Not to become a secondary issue, like a footnote to the NK security issue ROC was used as in the most recent affront by USA and Japan.


#14

I'll side w/ the UN. The PRC owns Taiwan.


#15

If that were true, perhaps these people you speak of should voice their position through a referendum.

I think it is very unlikely that Taiwan be more than a pawn in international politics simply due to close proximity of US, China and Japan. I believe the best thing to do is form temporary alliances when opportunity strikes and hope for the best. Short of moving Taiwan accross the Pacific next to BC I don't think this situation can be helped.

That said, the party advocating for referendum for Taiwanese to determine their own future does hold moral high ground. After all, a government that doesn't respect the wishes of its people does not have legitimacy to rule. By forbidding Taiwanese to have a referendum on Taiwan's future, PRC has demonstrated its lack of ability to govern without relying on armed threats and has forsaken any claim it has as the island's rightful governing body. Anyone who supports PRC on this issue is acting directly against the universal value of human rights and democracy. Therefore it is in my belief that these people, as well as anyone who seeks to act without regards to the majority consensus of those affected, have questionable moral standards


#16

Resolution 2758 recognized the PRC as the legitimate govt of China. It DID NOT transfer Taiwans sovereignty to the PRC. How about siding with the SFPT and recognizing that the USA legally holds Taiwans sovereignty on an interim basis? The following articles were published recently in Harvard Universitys "Harvard Asia Quarterly". Files with "_ch" at the end are Chinese language.

International Legal Status of Taiwan
taiwanbasic.com/military/haq/


#17


The law to hold a referendum is not party biased, it is invoked by a set of condition in ROC. However, there is a party that wasted it political credibility when it used it during the latest political election. Not only did DPP exaggerate the immediate threat to ROC, but it ignore the will of the people that we did not wish to increase military especially for the USA arms package.


Interesting when is CSB planning to step down base on principle. I believe at some point his approval rate was hooving in the mid 30's, when he lost is goal of not getting a majority in the LY. Now I hear he's loosing some pan-Green support because he has to kiss Song's butt to get any support at all in the middle ground. So CSB government is loosing support on all sides and he still hasn't step down.

No one is forbidding ROC from having a referendum. PRC is stating in no uncertain terms what their actions will be if ROC uses the referendum to as a tool for TI. There is still quite a large population of ROC that share the same sentiment. Who believe unification or being on friendlier and closer terms with the PRC is in the interest of ROC future development and well-being.

Or they believe in rule of law and that it is more peaceful to lob useless laws at each other than missles. Anyone who advocates anything but a peace resolution to the Strait Issue, does not love Taiwan and should leave for South America.

But at least they have healthy sex lives, being that they have loose morals. So conversely those that do advocate a position that will lead ROC closer to war with the PRC do not love Taiwan and have unhealthy sex lives.

But at least they have their morals.


#18

by "party" i wasn't speaking of a specific political party, just generally the people who advocates referendum for self-determination. By being voted into office, the governing party has been approved by the public to fulfill its mandate. If the people that does not wish to increase military or feels that 600 missiles does not constitute as a credible threat want to force their will onto the people who doesn't, then they can feel free to vote in the next presidential election and hope that their candidate win.

If a president has to step down whenever his popularity dips, then all popularly elected president will have an amazingly short term in office. He has been selected by democratic election, and his latest efforts has been aimed at accomodating the majority interest through inter-party cooperation. If someone doesn't want smoother government functions where different ideologies are accomodated, well i hope that person does not reflect majority opinion.

What the PRC is doing is the same as pointing a gun to your head and threatening to shoot if you voice your opinion. What reasonable, democratic country would do this to its own citizens?

If PRC is to attack, I highly doubt that there being a law or not will really make a difference. Anyone who believes in surrendering to the PRC should just go there. While I think you're right in there're not many people who want a military confrontation, I don't think there're many who would benefit from total submission.

Okay, well, that's an interesting statement. Are you saying that immoral people have more and better sex? hmm maybe I should reevaluate my position.


#19

Interesting concept. If you haven't notice the vast majority of people on Taiwan have lost their faith in government. Common phrase to describe the government is now "做 Show." CSB didn't win the faith of the people with his stunts and people obviously responded in the LY elections. The TI mandate has been invalidated repeatly on the Taiwan by the people.

That's really debateable. He was selected due to sympathy for his plight.

Because he realized after 4 years no one supports TI besides a small minority within the Green Coalition. It is an interesting rallying point to be anti-Blue, but realistically TI is dragging down Taiwan economy and further isolating ROC on the world stage.

Even our allies had to repremand us for stepping out of line on the Strait Issue because of TI hijacking ROC priorities and responsibility in working on a stable Strait solution.

PRC has given the opportunity for many ROC citizens to find gainful employment, in light of the irresponsible actions of our "elected" leaders and their TI policies.

Yes what democratic nation would have our "allies" rob us blind with overpriced equipment and call the nation that is a keystone to our economy the "enemy." Another shining example of the flaws in a democratic system.

Do you really think ROC, Taiwan has the luxury in taking the lead on this issue? That ROC, Taiwan has the ability demand anything from USA or China on the Strait Issue.

Taiwan's future lies in our ability to work with all sides on this issue. We don't have the resource to demand anything from anyone. One needs to face the reality of Taiwan once and a while. And not buy the hype of politician "做 Show" for the masses for a few points at the poll.

I was once told at a Christian retreat as a child that God did not condone pre-marital sex. In addition impure thoughts of sin were consider a sin in and of themselves. Need I say more

The point being there is no moral guage about which political system a State chooses to use in order to govern people.


#20

"做 Show." does not only apply to the governing coalition, nor does it only apply to politicians in Taiwan. One need only to look at Taipei's mayor, or the western politicians who went to the tsunami affected regions for "photo ops" to see this. The result of the LY election can be read many ways, and simply because immediate TI is dangerous, does not mean that people want unification. Most Taiwanese exist somewhere on the middle of the spectrum. However, that spectrum is shifting.

No matter how you look at it, CSB received more votes than every other candidate running for Taiwanese presidency twice in a row.

I fail to see how TI is dragging down Taiwan's economy, in the long run it should balance out. You seem to forget that it is ROC that got Taiwan into this diplomatic hole in the first place, and I don't see how TI make it any worse. A stable strait solution is of course any politician's objective in Taiwan, but how much more will we have to give up before Beijing stops pushing for more and more?

PRC also removed many opportunity for ROC citizens to find gainful employment by outsourcing Taiwanese firms. You seem to be implying that the arms purchase is a result of a democratic system, overlooking the fact that KMT has bought much more military hardware from other countries over the years. And that democratic nation you speak of also happen to be in the crosshairs of PLA and 700 missiles, I don't see the fault in calling the aggressor the enemy.

We don't have enough resources to demand anything from the big players, yet we posses too much to simply roll over and let others enslave us and rob us blind. The reality is that Taiwan must take a position that benefit its people the most, but what that position is is still up in debates.

I disagree. You cannot simply jail anyone who speaks up(or shoot them, as they did) and claim that a moral difference doesn't exist between that, and a system that respects people's wishes.