Clear this up for me. Should this thread be called:
Why is Independence Bad?
or
Why Would Declaring Independence be Bad?
Ac seems to be addressing the issue from the second title.
Some seem to be arguing that Taiwan is already independent.
Well, the fact that you are so actively discussing the “independence” option clearly shows that Taiwan is not independent at present. . . . . . . . . and indeed that is the viewpoint of most countries in the world community, and the United Nations.
Put simply, Taiwan is not a sovereign nation . . . . . . .
[quote=“Falcon”]Well, the fact that you are so actively discussing the “independence” option clearly shows that Taiwan is not independent at present. . . . . . . . . and indeed that is the viewpoint of most countries in the world community, and the United Nations.
Put simply, Taiwan is not a sovereign nation . . . . . . .[/quote]
Are you a broken record?
We’ve already had plenty of threads discussing what would be good and bad about declaring independence. I think Maowang’s question is a valid one. Excluding the threats of violence and pressure from the PRC, what is inherently bad about official independence (as in declaring it and making it so in ROC or “ROT” law)?
Actually, I was really trying to look beyond the attacking Chinese. The China attack scenario is an easy cop out. Often, I hear or read people admonish TI and TI supporters as if TI was the anti-Christ, Great Satan or the creator of America’s Funniest Home Videos. I have also seen the TI label used to try to debase people’s arguments as if TI is invalid and thus invalidates an argument…“Oh X is a typical TI argument, therefore…”. They seem to imply thay TI is radical extremism and CU is not… Is it? . I rarely hear any caveat in the anti TI argument. Often TI supporters will support unification through self determination, but only through a process of self-determination. Is this a two way street?
The Taiwan Independence movement, rather than adding instability to the cross strait situation, adds a counter strengh to Taiwan against China. TI has given China’s leaders one more worry and leads to Chinese pragmatism over Taiwan. Chinas leaders do not want to foster independence and are less likely to go to extreme measures that may drive Taiwanese that direction. TI also makes it a lot harder to claim Taiwanese are Chinese hostages of the KMT. Can TI be a soft weapon against China’s hard tactics? Is this good or bad?
I think it’s a blade with two sides. Utimately it’s more destablizing unless we reach a solution. One side has to give.
[quote=“Jive Turkey”][quote=“Falcon”]Well, the fact that you are so actively discussing the “independence” option clearly shows that Taiwan is not independent at present. . . . . . . . . and indeed that is the viewpoint of most countries in the world community, and the United Nations.
Put simply, Taiwan is not a sovereign nation . . . . . . .[/quote]
Are you a broken record?
We’ve already had plenty of threads discussing what would be good and bad about declaring independence. I think Maowang’s question is a valid one. Excluding the threats of violence and pressure from the PRC, what is inherently bad about official independence (as in declaring it and making it so in ROC or “ROT” law)?[/quote]
Simply put PRC has stated that if ROC unilaterally declares independence it will instigate a war. USA has also supported that position.
Even if the independence was recognized via a referendum on Taiwan, it would be considered a unilateral action on ROC part.
PRC and USA have admonished CSB to abide by his 4 no’s and 1 without principle.
Maowang’s question is devoid of reality because all international politics are extensions of a country’s ability to exert political, military, and economic pressures to further their interest.
The only peaceful solution is to approach the PRC diplomatically and negotiate ROC future state. Any other solution will not be acceptable by PRC and will give PRC more reasons to heighten their military, political, and economic strategies against Taiwan.
I disagree with Maowang on the premise that TI gives Taiwan more political leverage to the Strait Issue. Because it has taken a vague stability that “status quo” afforded Taiwan, and forced the USA to define exactly to what extent Taiwan “self-determination” USA is willing to tolerate. This gives PRC more information about the situation and confirms their suspicion that Bush would not “do whatever it takes” to defend Taiwan.
Thus, when the time comes for ROC and PRC to negotiate, ROC will have less leverage with the PRC to forward our interest.
In addition, I believe TI destabilizes the local political environment on Taiwan because they mainly campaign on ethnic distinction and a voice of aggrieves to garner support on Taiwan.
Many TI supporter see 228, White Terror, KMT reign, BSR vs. WSR as being all related to the Strait Issue, when in fact they are not.
The Strait Issue is about PRC and ROC coming to an understanding about their relationship. The Strait Issue is not an extension of the grievances some ROC citizens have against the KMT projected on the PRC.
The quicker ROC leadership come to realize that instigating the Strait Issue to garner local support is not productive to the overall health of ROC, the quicker the ROC can find a non-military solution out of the Strait Issue.
I support Taiwanese independence because it will force China into liberating Taiwan, and get its ass kicked by both the United States and Japan. 
Allow me to negate this even though it’s slightly off topic.
July 30, 2004 Xinhua article stating “One China” is a precondition for 3 links.
news.xinhuanet.com/taiwan/2004-0 … 557004.htm
And that Beijing’s turn around (Oct 2004), using a formula of negotiations Chen suggested,
news.xinhuanet.com/taiwan/2004-1 … 144919.htm
(note they still insist the links cannot be treated as international ones by Taiwan, and don’t even want Taiwan to use “cross strait” as a label to avoid the political topic)
is partly a response to Chen’s offer.
washingtontimes.com/world/200411 … -3783r.htm
[quote]July 30, 2004 Xinhua article stating “One China” is a precondition for 3 links.
news.xinhuanet.com/taiwan/2004-0 … 557004.htm [/quote]
This is our invitation to dinner.
[quote]我们再次重申，如果台湾当局确有诚意同意钱其琛关于
So, if Taiwan’s current government is steadily moving towards independence, pushing the envelope as much as it dares, while China and the US’s position against TI remain the same, at what point will the difference become so great it causes some kind of negative reaction towards America?
I ask this because so many “Let’s Declare Independence Now!” types rely on the argument that the US will always protect Taiwan no matter what, and, like Chen said yesterday in the news, disregard US warnings because “they don’t really mean it.” Chen actually argued at a rally yesterday “We’ve done so much and look! China hasn’t attacked yet!”
I just wonder how it’s going to be as an (apparent) American on the streets in a few years when the discrepancy has grown so great that the government here has told everyone the US actually supports TI when it actually doesn’t, and when push comes to shove, the US sits back and says “I told you so.”
I’m not saying this is definitely going to happen, but it is a possibiility.
[quote]http://etaiwannews.com/Taiwan/Politics/2004/12/09/1102558081.htm
A group of pro-independence activists staged a demonstration outside the American Institute in Taiwan yesterday to protest what they called the United States’ interference in Taiwan’s internal affairs.[/quote]
This cracks me up. I wonder what these protestors would say if USA decided not to interfere at all and rescind the TRA to appease these TSU protestors.
[quote]http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2004/12/09/2003214323
Chen stressed that only when the pan-green camp wins the legislative elections could Ma have a chance to extend his political future, [/quote]
This made me spit up some coffee. Is CSB that desperate for the women’s vote that he needs to invoke the name of the sexy Mayor Ma in his campaign?
Maybe Chen was veing a smart azz and saying that when the green team clean up in the LY elections, Ma will come running to the DPP wanting to join…
[quote=“ac_dropout”] Simply put PRC has stated that if ROC unilaterally declares independence it will instigate a war. USA has also supported that position.
[/quote]
Since when has the USA supported China in instigating a war against Taiwan?
I think you’ve got your facts muddled up. China is like an old farty husband who has separated from his wife but wants still to control her destiny by threats, and by not allowing her the formal divorce and an independent life.
It 's possible China could go theway of the old Soviet bloc or Yugoslavia and break up into separate entities again. I always love to hear this talk from mainlanders about China’s 6000 years of history yada yada yada when it’s only been one country for 2500 years.
China and Taiwan are similiar in some respects, they are just third world countries with money. AS for me, my freedom is not for sale, so I’ll vote for independence thank you very much…
BTW, when was the last time a leader of China stepped foot in Taiwan? Please tell me they came here at least once in the last thousand years.
PS The KMT don’t count as they weren’t the leaders of China anymore when they fled here.
[quote=“maowang”]A few posters and several politicos seem to imply thta Taiwan Independence is inherently bad. I am interested in understanding why… beyond the “then China will attack” argument.
Could those who feel this way explain your opinions?[/quote]
I guess I’m disqualified from the discussion, because “beyond the ‘then China will attack’ argument,” I have nothing against Taiwanese independence.
In fact, even “the ‘then China would attack’ argument” doesn’t provide me with anything against Taiwanese independence, with the proviso that Taiwan should not consider it money in the bank that the U.S. will risk a potentially devastating war with China in support of Taiwanese independence.
But I forgot: we’re not supposed to consider the little ol’ “then China will attack” argument. We’re supposed, borrowing from the title of an old Joan Didion essay, to “get that monster out of [our] mind[s].”
Okay, here’s what I think about Taiwanese independence beyond a “then China may attack, and if they do, the U.S. is expected by some to risk nuclear war in Taiwan’s defense” argument:
[quote]What a beautfiul world this will be
What a glorious time to be free[/quote]–Donald Fagen, “IGY”
He has been adhering to the letter of the 4 noes and the one without policy so far. he actually keeps his word, you know.
Yeah, they lost so much faith in Chen that they gave the DPP more seats than last time. I don’t know how Chen lives with himself.
AC, your statements show a misunderstanding. The DPP never refused to have any committee, and never refused to hold money from any committee; they simply said the committee in its current form was unconstitutional, and took it to court. They won. You are the only person who has managed to spin the decision as a blue win or one that puts the pressure on A-bian.
The DPP agreed the LY could form such a commission, just not with the unconstitutional powers the Blues wanted to give it.
Besides, before anything else can be done the law for the committee has to be amended, there have to be no more constitutional challenges, and then A-bian can start doing his aprt.
Yeah, they lost so much faith in Chen that they gave the DPP more seats than last time. I don’t know how Chen lives with himself.[/quote]
I never said the rise of Hoklo racism was not occurring on Taiwan, which is also a core constituency of the DPP. Nor are we mentioning voters migrating to parties with ideology closer to
Which is why I call him a waffle. His most recent LY campaign directly challenged his own policy.
Let’s say CSB got his wish with a pan-Green majority, his campaign led people to believe (including the USA) that he was going to set new policies that would contradict the spirit of the 4 no’s 1 without.
Even his referendum during the presidential election contradict the spirit of the 4 no’s 1 without policy. Which is why only a die-hard pan-Green supporter would trust CSB.
Everyone else see him as being inconsistent and unstable to the Strait Issue.
Same with the Chairman position of the DPP. First he says “no,” then he says “yes,” now he says “no.”
This is not the type leader I would trust in a war. CSB is adept with the pen and looking for legal loopholes. Not with sword and the lives of men on a battlefield.
So even if I became a radical Taidu supporter in the future. I would not support men like CSB to lead us through the war for independence. His type are really peace time leaders.
Yeah, they lost so much faith in Chen that they gave the DPP more seats than last time. I don’t know how Chen lives with himself.[/quote]
I never said the rise of Hoklo racism was not occurring on Taiwan, which is also a core constituency of the DPP. Nor are we mentioning voters migrating to parties with ideology closer to