Ma’s idea seems to be avoiding a military confrontation with the PRC by offering policies which the CCP can regard as movements towards eventual reunification.This Scheherazade strategy seems to have been rejected by many Taiwanese but what is the alternative?Scheherazade should not have had to keep telling stories to go on living but she did what she had to to survive.Ma seems to be following the same basic strategy but he offers new cross strait agreements instead of stories.So what is the alternative?How does one preserve Taiwan’s freedom?Taiwan has every moral right to resist Beijing’s demands for reunification but what if the latter decides to issue ultimatums backed by the threat of invasion?The question is not so much what the people of Taiwan want but what price they are willing to pay for it.In a conventional military confrontation,the ROC has no chance so is it ready to consider other alternatives?If so,what are they?
How about dealing with China on a state to state basis, a la pre-2004, and have these policies go through normal legislative processes, establish a standard process if there isn’t one already in place, and communicate with all opposition leaders in private, then discuss what he can tell the people on TV.
The only reason he isn’t doing any of the communication is because Ma isn’t pulling a Scheheranzade, and views opposition leaders as if they were from an enemy state. But I suppose that’s what happens when there is no consensus on national identity.
Appeasing a bully and aggressor? I don’t think that makes sense - at best it delays the inevitable.
If Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, and Korea got their act together they would form a defense alliance and economic cooperation network.
Those 5 countries would explicitly renounce all territorial ambitions (for Taiwan this would mean to change the constitution) and thus gain the moral support of many moderate countries in the world.
Faced with the explicit stance of this alliance to not attack anybody, China’s expansionists and hawks would lose steam and moderates in China would gain.
The timing is good right now, since there are signs that moderates in China are on the up.
[quote=“hansioux”]How about dealing with China on a state to state basis, a la pre-2004, and have these policies go through normal legislative processes, establish a standard process if there isn’t one already in place, and communicate with all opposition leaders in private, then discuss what he can tell the people on TV.
The only reason he isn’t doing any of the communication is because Ma isn’t pulling a Scheheranzade, and views opposition leaders as if they were from an enemy state. But I suppose that’s what happens when there is no consensus on national identity.[/quote]
Ma definitely needs to build a consensus with opposition leaders.I hope he will do so.
Appeasing a bully and aggressor? I don’t think that makes sense - at best it delays the inevitable.
If Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, and Korea got their act together they would form a defense alliance and economic cooperation network.
Those 5 countries would explicitly renounce all territorial ambitions (for Taiwan this would mean to change the constitution) and thus gain the moral support of many moderate countries in the world.
Faced with the explicit stance of this alliance to not attack anybody, China’s expansionists and hawks would lose steam and moderates in China would gain.
The timing is good right now, since there are signs that moderates in China are on the up.
[/quote]
Such an alliance would be great but I’ve seen no indication the other countries have any interest in joining Taiwan in such an undertaking.Have you?
Imagine Scheherazade playing strip poker instead of telling stories.
Alternatives?
1991 Consensus: Let China first democratize and have human rights, then we’ll talk.
1982 Consensus: Total hard-line, including nuke threats. No business or family ties allowed.
1892 Consensus: Long live the Qing!
Postmodern Consensus: Agree that Taiwan Independence and Chinese Reunification are really the same thing, but that they can be interpreted in different ways. Everyone declares victory and goes home happy.
He (Ma) and other KMT people (Lien …) are just preparing a soft landing for them the moment it comes to a unification … no more, no less …
There are plenty of things that could be done in Taiwan to work towards independence while maintaining more or less cordial relationships with China, mainly built around government-led cultural change. The Taiwanese people are actually pretty clear on their identity:
A total of 93.1% of people here consider themselves Taiwanese, while about 1/3 consider themselves Taiwanese and Chinese. Only 3.5% consider themselves Chinese. And that’s probably not dissimilar from Americans who consider themselves Irish or Italian, but you don’t see them looking to reunify with Ireland or Italy.
So, I think the government needs to do things to support the vast majority of people who consider themselves Taiwanese, like:
- Bring Taiwanese language back to the level it once was, make it an optional language to do coursework in schools as opposed to a 40-minutes per week extra; same for Hakka where possible
- Bring English into schools properly, not necessarily as an “English class” and not necessarily as a whole curriculum in English (Taiwan could look to Singapore for multilingual education options)
- Revise history textbooks so that they are in line with standard explanations given by the scientific community worldwide, and present multiple points of view
- Make Taiwanese history a priority, cover things like what percent of people in Taiwan today came from which wave of immigration, etc.
- Continue with what Chen Shui-bian started and keep renaming things (Post = Taiwan Post; Phone = Taiwan Telecom; etc.), perhaps even start changing 中正路 to “Forumosa Rd.” or something
- Open immigration a lot more than it is currently
Also, whatever constitutional reforms could be done without inciting China to attack should be done. Like for example, if the constitution could have a clause saying that the official name of the country is “Republic of China,” but that the preferred nickname for the country is “Taiwan,” and that “Taiwan” may be used in place of “Republic of China” on any document, legal or not. They should change the flag, too. A couple of these might be good options.
Finally, Taiwan should be on the phones daily with any US/EU allied countries who will pick up, asking for advice, how they can have closer ties with that country, how they can join trade agreements with that country, and so on.
Without declaring independence, and in fact without even making any public statements about “working towards independence,” the government can push forward by making such significant cultural changes that Taiwan & China are too split along cultural lines to ever reunify politically, and eventually it will simply make sense for China to just sign a treaty and end the war.
You may be right.If CCP rule of Taiwan is inevitable,then all one can do is try to make the best deal.But is it inevitable?
[quote=“greves”]There are plenty of things that could be done in Taiwan to work towards independence while maintaining more or less cordial relationships with China, mainly built around government-led cultural change. The Taiwanese people are actually pretty clear on their identity:
A total of 93.1% of people here consider themselves Taiwanese, while about 1/3 consider themselves Taiwanese and Chinese. Only 3.5% consider themselves Chinese. And that’s probably not dissimilar from Americans who consider themselves Irish or Italian, but you don’t see them looking to reunify with Ireland or Italy.
So, I think the government needs to do things to support the vast majority of people who consider themselves Taiwanese, like:
- Bring Taiwanese language back to the level it once was, make it an optional language to do coursework in schools as opposed to a 40-minutes per week extra; same for Hakka where possible
- Bring English into schools properly, not necessarily as an “English class” and not necessarily as a whole curriculum in English (Taiwan could look to Singapore for multilingual education options)
- Revise history textbooks so that they are in line with standard explanations given by the scientific community worldwide, and present multiple points of view
- Make Taiwanese history a priority, cover things like what percent of people in Taiwan today came from which wave of immigration, etc.
- Continue with what Chen Shui-bian started and keep renaming things (Post = Taiwan Post; Phone = Taiwan Telecom; etc.), perhaps even start changing 中正路 to “Forumosa Rd.” or something
- Open immigration a lot more than it is currently
Also, whatever constitutional reforms could be done without inciting China to attack should be done. Like for example, if the constitution could have a clause saying that the official name of the country is “Republic of China,” but that the preferred nickname for the country is “Taiwan,” and that “Taiwan” may be used in place of “Republic of China” on any document, legal or not. They should change the flag, too. A couple of these might be good options.
Finally, Taiwan should be on the phones daily with any US/EU allied countries who will pick up, asking for advice, how they can have closer ties with that country, how they can join trade agreements with that country, and so on.
Without declaring independence, and in fact without even making any public statements about “working towards independence,” the government can push forward by making such significant cultural changes that Taiwan & China are too split along cultural lines to ever reunify politically, and eventually it will simply make sense for China to just sign a treaty and end the war.[/quote]
You have some very interesting ideas.Are they purely yours or are they shared by any organizations in Taiwan?
Alternative: Treat China like any other country - Belgium, Algeria, India, etc.
China doesn’t do dealings with Taiwan on a state to state basis. Period. Leaders here can spout off as much as they like about some consensus or what they think Taiwan is or isn’t. But insist that any treaty be phrased in a way such that it reflects Taiwan and China conducting business between states and you may as well say there will be no dealings with China.
On a government to government level, Taiwan has virtually zero relationship with nearly every government on Earth. For the ROC government to treat China like it does Belgium is basically saying to ignore its existence and to be ignored…something that is pretty much impossible.
[quote=“redpolko”]
You have some very interesting ideas.Are they purely yours or are they shared by any organizations in Taiwan?[/quote]
Of course I’m going to take a huge amount of flak for saying this, but many of them have been policy positions of the DPP since A-bian… excepting the internationalization stuff. But there are plenty of organizations that support internationalization in and of Taiwan, too.
China doesn’t do dealings with Taiwan on a state to state basis. Period. Leaders here can spout off as much as they like about some consensus or what they think Taiwan is or isn’t. But insist that any treaty be phrased in a way such that it reflects Taiwan and China conducting business between states and you may as well say there will be no dealings with China.[/quote]
there were many dealings between China and Taiwan during the LTH era and CSB era. It was CSB’s administration first negotiated for direct flights. By Ma setting precedence in allowing China to belittle Taiwan in treaties, means China would simply use non-negotiation as a threat to achieve whatever agenda they desire. That is not a long term solution to any issue. So while in the short term holding out our principles might make life difficult, letting China walk all over Taiwan would make life difficult period.
Only by consistently electing people against selling out Taiwan’s interests into office would China realize they position is pushing the Taiwanese people away from unification.
As long as the average Taiwanese person continues to believe that their road to wealth is through China, the mainland won’t even consider force. China’s ploy has been and I think will continue to be fooling Taiwanese people into believing they need China for money…not just any money, but the money they get. This is clearly not true and Ma’s absolute failure in even one economic success marker (and lots of empty promises) has created a set back to be sure. However, China’s inviting people from all sides of the political arena (Chen Chu was there not long ago) for “economic forums” shows that they know what motivates people. I hate to compare with US politics, but it’s kind of how the Republicans get mouth breathing trailer trash who collect social security and welfare to vote for them by listening to Limbaugh, who tells them that government taxes are destroying them when in reality it’s only people like Limbaugh who really thrive under Republican tax policies. The average Taiwanese person will not see any direct or indirect increase in money from closer economic ties with China, but Ma’s promises that this would be true are what got him elected (twice! even when it was clear he was full of sh*t) and it will continue to drive how people here view reunification with China.
A million better ways to make more money than selling your country out to China exist and to me that’s not difficult to understand. But people here being as they are, they would much rather believe that a magic fairy (Ma) will wave a magic wand (ECFA) and their bank accounts will magically increase- poof: the average Taiwanese salary is US$30k annually (that’s what he promised). It didn’t happen and it won’t happen-but how much you want to bet that China wins this “war” by convincing people it will happen?
China doesn’t do dealings with Taiwan on a state to state basis. Period. Leaders here can spout off as much as they like about some consensus or what they think Taiwan is or isn’t. But insist that any treaty be phrased in a way such that it reflects Taiwan and China conducting business between states and you may as well say there will be no dealings with China.[/quote]
there were many dealings between China and Taiwan during the LTH era and CSB era. It was CSB’s administration first negotiated for direct flights. By Ma setting precedence in allowing China to belittle Taiwan in treaties, means China would simply use non-negotiation as a threat to achieve whatever agenda they desire. That is not a long term solution to any issue. So while in the short term holding out our principles might make life difficult, letting China walk all over Taiwan would make life difficult period.
Only by consistently electing people against selling out Taiwan’s interests into office would China realize they position is pushing the Taiwanese people away from unification.[/quote]
China is not now and not in the foreseeable future going to realize anything. Negotiate as much as you like, but China has not, and will never sign anything that reflects state to state negotiations. Some people are ok with that, it’s a price they think is worth paying and I can respect that. I’ve always held the opinion that the Taiwanese should decide for themselves whats best for them and thats all good as far as I can see, I dont see any scenario where Unification is on the cards. Refusal to accept the one China principle will make dealing with China more difficult and trying to sign treaties with other countries more difficult as well, or i should say even more difficult than it already is. But I can understand why people would think that way. It is what it is, China claims Taiwan as a part of China, they will not sign anything that would suggest otherwise, there will be no visits on a state to state basis.
[quote=“Mick”]
China is not now and not in the foreseeable future going to realize anything. Negotiate as much as you like, but China has not, and will never sign anything that reflects state to state negotiations. Some people are ok with that, it’s a price they think is worth paying and I can respect that. I’ve always held the opinion that the Taiwanese should decide for themselves whats best for them and thats all good as far as I can see, I don’t see any scenario where Unification is on the cards. Refusal to accept the one China principle will make dealing with China more difficult and trying to sign treaties with other countries more difficult as well, or i should say even more difficult than it already is. But I can understand why people would think that way. It is what it is, China claims Taiwan as a part of China, they will not sign anything that would suggest otherwise, there will be no visits on a state to state basis.[/quote]
Everything you said here is true, but that’s the price people here have to pay to lose everything, including freedom, all together.
I think China can’t maintain its current course forever. When their economic boost slows down, it would be extremely difficult for a “communist” government to justify all the oppression against powerless farmers/workers, and continue to deny them a voice via votes. I mean they would need someone really charismatic to keep the lid on without changing, someone like Putin.
So it’s only a matter of time for Taiwan to have an opportunity to make a decision, or if things goes really badly, be forced to make that decision. There’s no need for Taiwan to corner itself into a situation where it is so tightly coupled with China to get dragged to the bottom with it.
Too bad postmodernism never really caught on in this part of the world. :-s
Ma’s China policy is built on the 1992 Consensus, which is strictly speaking a lie. The “consensus” was unilateral – the ROC negotiator (Su Chi) said there is only one country on this planet called China, and both Taiwan and the mainland (and presumably Mongolia and Hong Kong and Macau) are parts of it. That was the policy of both the government in Beijing and the government in Taipei at the time. The part that Su made up is that the PRC and the ROC agreed to disagree on which one of them was the rightful China. So if the consensus holds, foreign media reports should say “China claims Taiwan as a renegade province, and Taiwan claims China as a bunch of renegade provinces.” Most journalists don’t care about getting those facts straight though.
While it’s called the 1992 Consensus, Su Chi admits the term didn’t exist until years later and there was never a formal text of agreement. On top of that, there was no explicit public mention of the consensus by China until 2008, after Ma Ying-jeou took office. And China is slippery with its wording – while it demands any politician or party conducting exchanges with the CPC supports the 1992 Consensus, it doesn’t explicitly state that the CPC also follows such a policy.
Instead of 1992 Consensus, I think it should be renamed Anti-Taiwan Independence Consensus because that’s basically what it means. This is unsustainable as a national policy because it’s something the KMT supports but the DPP and its allies reject, so every time the party in power switches so will China policy. When you look at it from this perspective, it’s much easier to understand – and it underscores the reason the blue and green political forces in Taiwan need to up communication with each other to come up with an internal agreement on what to do about the China problem. This I believe is what Tsai Ing-wen, chairperson of the DPP, has dubbed a theoretical “Taiwan consensus.”
But Tsai is sadly a Taiwanese politician, which means she speaks in riddles and nobody has any idea what that phrase means. If she could improve her communication with the public, I’m sure tons of people would support the very reasonable concept of the DPP and KMT (and all others in Taiwan) talking openly about what they want in the future.