Kinmen and Matsu are not part of the traditional definition of “Taiwan” (Formosa and Pescadores). Its inhabitants identify themselves as Chinese, but unanimously prefer to be under ROC administration (aka “Taiwan”). Hence, they are the living remnants of the “vanished nation” referred to by CKS. The ROC government could be re-exiled to these islands for it to establish the unification they so wish to. China is finally united, voila!
And Taiwan loses its courts, government, legislature, and constitutional guarantee of democracy, since these are all artifacts of the ROC.
Civil court and go on as they do now until new laws are passed by a new legislature, which would first draft a new constitution, there are already a couple Taiwan constitutions out there that can be used as a reference.
Before the constitution is ironed out, I think they can do a quick bill of rights to guarantee democracy right away. Most constitutions in the world guarantees democracy though, like PRC and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. It’s one thing to mention democracy on a piece of paper, but those in power can bend democracy to mean anything they want.
I know that removing the ROC government from Taiwan wouldn’t actually throw it into a state of lawlessness, but I like to play the devil’s advocate. Still, I see no reason to scrap a functioning government with a multiparty democracy and start over from scratch. Wouldn’t it just make more sense to adjust the constitution? At this point I think a lot of Taiwanese people, even independence-minded ones, would even like to keep the name ROC and just have nothing to do with that other China.
it is impossible to make changes to the constitution after they modified it the last time in 2005 raising required votes to sponsored by a quarter of the legislators, 3/4 must attend the vote, and 3/4 of those must vote yes (more than the supermajorities required to amend the US constitution). After that a referendum must also be passed to approve the vote, which coupled with a even crappier referendum law makes the whole process completely useless.
The majority party of the legislative yuan made that modification, instead of just a yes/no vote, because they wanted to prevent “TI through constitutional adjustments.”
Are you implying its easier to start an armed revolt and kick out the government? I kind of doubt that.
I think at this point the ball has been taken from Taiwanese public’s hand even if there is a consensus for independence. In the end external powers will force Taiwanese public’s hand, again.
I think at this point the ball has been taken from Taiwanese public’s hand even if there is a consensus for independence. In the end external powers will force Taiwanese public’s hand, again.[/quote]
Not unless China is replaced on the Security Council, or the UN is disassembled.
[quote=“CBCnews”]
Not unless China is replaced on the Security Council, or the UN is disassembled.[/quote]
I’m pretty sure nobody else in the world would give Taiwan much thought if the world has come to that…
What about Taiping Island? Just a bargaining chip by now?
Firmly “Chinese” territory. The ROC’s claim to the island (other than being able to control it) is the same historical irredentism it uses to claim Taiwan, Kinmen and Matsu, and Mongolia. “It belonged to China at one point in history. We are China. So it is ours.” Imagine if the British tried to use this line of argument… 
[quote=“hansioux”][quote=“CBCnews”]
Not unless China is replaced on the Security Council, or the UN is disassembled.[/quote]
I’m pretty sure nobody else in the world would give Taiwan much thought if the world has come to that…[/quote]
No they wouldn’t, but it would certainly make global recognition by the international community much more convenient.
Firmly “Chinese” territory. The ROC’s claim to the island (other than being able to control it) is the same historical irredentism it uses to claim Taiwan, Kinmen (Jinmen) and Mazu, and Mongolia. “It belonged to China at one point in history. We are China. So it is ours.” Imagine if the British tried to use this line of argument… [/quote]
Here’s the thing about the Spratlys and Paracels; everybody wants a piece of it. It isn’t just about China exerting claims to the entire South China Sea. Even if China relinquished maritime claims, you’d have the dispute shifted from China vs everybody to Philippines vs Vietnam. And these are ASEAN countries we’re talking about (nothing more than a regional “talk shop”). So, for Taiping’s case, as hypocritical as it sounds; is first-come, first-serve. Taiwan’s government is also unlikely to give up the only Paracel with fresh water supply.
You can’t have it both ways. Either embrace Taiwaneseness and keep only Taiwan and its immediate environs, or embrace the idea of the ROC. Taiping and the SCS have literally nothing to do with the people of Taiwan (other than the Taiwanese who go there as coast guardsmen).
Taiping could be designated as overseas Taiwanese territory, akin to the relationship between Falklands and the UK.
Why not move everybody of Han ancestry to Kinmen and Matsu and give the land back to the people who have lived off the land the longest? A Republic of Taiwan would be just as much of an oppressor of “natives” as the current Republic of China.
Firmly “Chinese” territory. The ROC’s claim to the island (other than being able to control it) is the same historical irredentism it uses to claim Taiwan, Kinmen (Jinmen) and Mazu, and Mongolia. “It belonged to China at one point in history. We are China. So it is ours.” Imagine if the British tried to use this line of argument… [/quote]
China isn’t battering an eye to (Outer) Mongolia now due to Russia’s interference and the fact that they’re both allies and Security Council members. I’m sure China has no qualms about taking it, if allowed to. They took Tibet, 'cause they weren’t afraid of India. Had China feared Japan, they’d too quiet down about taking Taiwan by force.
Then all of the Americas and Australia/NZ with non-native/aboriginal ancestry go back to Europe, Africa, etc. Next time use some logic when coming up with arguments like that.
I’m using the same exact logic. Good luck with getting anybody in the areas you mentioned getting on board with your plan.
The ROC does not want unification with the PRC. When are you guys going to stop with this bull crap.
It’s not ours to stop:
[quote]For our party, the eventual goal is reunification, but we don’t have a timetable. At the moment, we don’t believe that either side is prepared to have unification… The conditions are really not ripe yet.[/quote]–Then-Kuomintang Chairman Ma Ying-jeou, interview, in Jonathan Adams, “Conditions Aren’t Ripe,” Newsweek, December 25, 2005 newsweek.com/conditions-arent-ripe-114231
[quote]A Ministry of Education circular describing Nanjing as the Republic of China’s capital and Taipei as the current seat of its central government is shown in a photo posted on Facebook yesterday by National Taipei University of Education professor Lee Hsiao-feng.[/quote]–photo caption from Chris Wang, “Schools to teach Nanjing is ROC capital: ministry,” Taipei Times, December 4, 2013 taipeitimes.com/News/front/p … 2008094917
I’m 61 years old, and I’ve lived here for twelve years. It seems as if you’re asking me to disregard all that I’ve seen and learned in 61 years, along with the evidence I’ve seen here in the past twelve years, and replace these things with what appears to me to be a mere assertion on your part. That’s probably not going to happen.