|
MAKING A NEW TAIWAN CONSTITUTION |
2004-09-13 11:06:15 |
Munakata Takayuki
|
ip: 220.X.X.X |
MAKING A NEW TAIWAN CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A SOVEREIGN AND DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY: THE WAY TO GET TAIWAN INTO INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
By Munakata Takayuki (Asian Security Forum)
English version translated by Professor Shane Lee
Contents
1.Diplomatic Failure Led to Isolation of Taiwan from International Community
2.The Korean War Changed the Situation
3.Sino-American Contacts Oscillated the Situation
4.The UN Recognized that Taiwan’s Status in International Law Was Unsettled
5.Under the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), Taiwan Cannot Establish Itself a Sovereign and Democratic Country
6.The Taiwan Relations Act Encourages the Abolition of the Republic of China
7.PRC’sAmbitions and the Realities
8.Taiwanese Do not Succumb to Chinese Intimidation and American Pressure
9.A Wish for the Success of Making a New Taiwan Constitution
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
1.Diplomatic Failure Led to Isolation of Taiwan from International Community
There are over 190 sovereign countries in the world recognizing and engaging in diplomatic relations with one another and being recognized as members of the international community as headed by the United Nations. However, Taiwan has diplomatic relations with only 20 some countries, major countries not included. Taiwan is excluded from the UN. The isolation has devastatingly disadvantaged Taiwan politically and economically and has even imposed upon its citizens many unnecessary restrictions and troubles when they travel abroad. More seriously, Taiwan is excluded from the international security system. International laws clearly prohibit the threat or use of force against other countries, yet China has repeatedly threatened to use force against Taiwan. If Taiwan, like all other countries, is a sovereign country and a member of the UN, the international community will never allow such Chinese threats.
Diplomatic failure on the part of Taiwan may also be blamed for the isolation. To get out of the isolation, Taiwan has to rectify its diplomatic policies. For over 30 years of isolation, Taiwan has not formulated a thorough policy to deal with such situation.
Can the international community ever accept Taiwan? To answer this question, we must first clarify the reasons for the isolation. The main reason for such isolation was the UN resolution in 1971, which replaced the Chiang Kai-shek regime with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the legitimate representative of China in the UN. The cause for this was entirely due to Chiang’s failure. Chiang was an absolute dictator in Taiwan and no one dared to talk about or study on his failure. After his death, his son Chiang Ching-kuo succeeded his dictatorship and did not lift 38-year martial law (known as the “white terror?in Taiwan) until 1987. Even more than 10 years into democracy, Taiwan is still silent about Chiang’s failure. In this essay I would like to explore the reasons for Taiwan’s isolation and suggest a way for Taiwan to re-enter the international community.
2.The Korean War Changed the Situation
Chinese Communists defeated Chiang’s Nationalists and established the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on October 1, 1949 and countries headed by the former Soviet Union immediately recognized the new republic. Among liberal democracies, Great Britain was the first to recognize PRC on January 6, 1950. On January 13, 1950, the Soviet Union proposed to the Security Council to replace the Chiang’s regime with PRC. The US and other countries rejected this proposal. Since then, more and more countries recognized PRC and its admission into the UN was only a matter of time.
The Korean War changed the situation. On June 25, 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea. On June 27, the US proposed to the Security Council to support South Korea to repel North Korea’s invasion and the proposal was approved. The main reason for the approval was that the Soviet Union abstained from the meeting in protest against the disapproval of its proposal to admit PRC. On the same day, US President Truman ordered US troops to deplore in the Korean Peninsula and the 7th Fleet to station in the Taiwan Strait to prevent conflicts between PRC and ROC. On July 7, the UN Security Council decided to give power to the US to command the UN troops in the Korean Peninsula and General Douglas MacArthur was appointed the supreme commander. South Korean President Syngman Rhee also handed the Korean troops to the US. North Korean troops were pushed back to the borders of PRC and on October 19, PRC began to support North Korea in the war.
As hostilities broke out between US and PRC, US government began to severely review its policy towards China, which was becoming communist. As casualties mounted, American people reacted rather negatively to PRC. The policy of “containing China?was thus formulated as a result and US strongly supported ROC’s representation in the UN. “The issue of China’s representation?indicated that the dispute was about representation. Since China is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, whoever represents China is naturally a permanent member of the Council.
It’s rather unreasonable for ROC to represent China for it did not rule a piece of the Chinese mainland. As time went by, more and more countries supported PRC in UN. In order to block PRC, the US proposed that “The issue of China’s representation?be treated as an “important issue?under UN Charter Article 18, which was to be approved by two-thirds majority of the UN members. The majority of the UN members adopted the proposal.
3.Sino-American Contacts Oscillated the Situation
In 1971, international situation had a great change, namely the US began to have contacts with hostile PRC.After World War Two, the liberalist camp headed by the US and the socialist camp headed by the USSR were formed as two opposing blocs on the international stage known as the “cold war.?PRC respected USSR as its big brother and the two brothers vowed to unite as one. However, the two brothers had ideological differences and soon became hostile towards each other. Both began to deploy large troops along their mutual borders. Thus the two super powers, the US and the USSR, both became enemies of the PRC. To get out of this dilemma the PRC had to improve its relations with either one. Since both the PRC and the USSR were communist countries, their ideological differences were serious and there seemed to be no solution.
.
As for the US, improved relations with the PRC would be favorable to the cold war situation. At the time, President Nixon was in big trouble with the Vietnam War. He decided to pull 500,000 troops out of Vietnam, leaving about 100,000 troops behind. It was obvious that a total withdrawal would allow North Vietnam to defeat South Vietnam. In the name of defending freedom, the US was not about to forsake South Vietnam and certainly not to leave American captives in the hands of North Vietnam. It was imperative that the US signs a peace agreement with North Vietnam. However, North Vietnam believed that victory was near and was reluctant to sign a peace agreement. Therefore, President Nixon wanted to use the assistance of the PRC in this matter. Without any industrial base, North Vietnam depended on the communist bloc and the PRC to fight the Vietnam War. Its harbors and airfields were under the control of the US air force, and its supplies were mostly shipped through Chinese routes. There was a major consensus between the US and the PRC in terms of national interest.
In July 1971, US Secretary of State, Dr. Henry Kissinger, secretly paid a visit to the PRC and met Chinese premier Chou En-lai. On July 17, he announced that President Nixon agreed to visit the PRC in May 1972. The announcement shocked the world, signaling that the US was about to abandon its “containment policy?for a cooperation policy towards the PRC. It became clear that at the UN General Assembly that year, the PRC was to enter the UN.
The US intention was that the PRC sat in the Security Council while the ROC retained its membership in the UN. At the time, if Chiang Kai-shek so desired, it was easy for the ROC to retain its UN membership as long as it gave up its permanent seat in the Security Council. If this had been the case, the “the issue of China’s representation?would have been solved by the General Assembly. It would have been impossible for the PRC’s demand to expel the ROC from UN. Under Article 6 of the UN Charter, expulsion of membership has to be recommended by the Security Council and approved by two-thirds majority of the UN members (Article 18). As long as the US used its veto, no proposal to expel the ROC was possible.
Even if the PRC became a permanent member of the Security Council, the membership of the ROC in the UN means that the PRC and the ROC are two separate countries. Thus any disputes between the PRC and the ROC are international issues, not domestic issues. According to Article 2, Section
4,ll members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state,?the PRC would be prohibited from the threat of use of force against Taiwan and would have to abandon its desire to annex Taiwan.
4.The UN Recognized that Taiwan’s Status in International Law Was Unsettled
For the PRC, being a permanent member of the Security Council means not only it is one of the most powerful countries in the world, but also enjoys many powers including the veto power. However, the PRC was not going to abandon its intention to annex in exchange for all these. That was the reason for Albanian Resolution, namely to admit the PRC and at the same time to expel the ROC. If the proposal to admit the PRC had specified that the ROC should be expelled, it would have been impossible because it would have been a case of membership expulsion. The Albanian Resolution specified that the Chiang Kai-shek Regime, not the ROC, be expelled from the UN.
All these were designed to mean that the Chiang Kai-shek Regime was a regime that occupied Taiwan and he ROC was not a state; when the PRC was established it succeeded the ROC and the ROC ceased to exist. This is clear from Article 23 of the UN Charter, which specifies that the ROC, not the PRC is a permanent member of the Security Council. Apparently in the eye of the UN, the PRC succeeded the ROC and the ROC ceased to exist.
On October 25, 1971, the Albanian Resolution was voted at the General Assembly. The PRC successfully expelled the Chiang regime from the UN. The resolution had nevertheless advantaged Taiwan, because if the UN regarded the ROC non-existing, it meant that the UN recognized that Taiwan could not a territory of non-existing ROC.
If the UN recognized Taiwan is a territory of the ROC, it meant that the ROC existed on Taiwan. Taiwan is not ruled by any other country; it has its own territory and people, and as long as it has an effective government, it is a sovereign and independent country. The government of the ROC has effectively ruled Taiwan and the Pescadores and thus Taiwan appears to be a sovereign country. The question is, does the ROC have sovereignty over Taiwan and the Pescadores according to international law?
On September 2, 1945, the day Japan signed the agreement to surrender, UN Supreme Commander MacArthur issued general order No. 1, which specified to who the Japanese troops should surrender. Like US occupation of Japan and USSR occupation of the Manchuria, Chiang regime’s occupation of Taiwan was only temporary military occupation. However, the Chiang regime cited the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Declaration to interpret that Taiwan and the Pescadores as ROC’s territories. The PRC also used the same interpretation to claim that Taiwan and the Pescadores were ROC’s territories and the PRC inherited these territories. Nevertheless, the Cairo Declaration was nothing but a joint press communiqu?of the meeting of President Roosevelt of the US, Prime Minister Churchill of Great Britain,President Chiang Kai-shek of China. Taiwan and the Pescadores were not territories of the US or Great Britain, and neither of them had the authority to dispose of these territories. Even if the Cairo Declaration mentioned that these territories were to be given to the ROC, it had no validity in international law. The Potsdam Declaration urging Japan to surrender likewise mentioned the implementation of the Cairo Declaration and had no validity in international law. As a rule, change of territories as a result of war must be disposed of by a peace treaty between the warring countries. The 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty between defeated Japan and the victorious allies did mention that Japan renounce its rights over Taiwan and the Pescadores, but it did not mention who was to receive these territories. Therefore, the US, Great Britain, Japan and many other countries regarded Taiwan’s legal status unsettled.
If the legal status Taiwan and the Pescadores was unsettled, the ROC has no territories as recognized by international law. Although the ROC has ruled Quemoy and Matsu, but they are small islands off the shores and within the territorial waters of the PRC. It is correct to say that the ROC has no territory as recognized by international law and the PRC succeeded the ROC; the Chiang regime is nothing but a political regime occupying Taiwan.
The PRC realized that the Albanian Resolution meant that the UN recognized the unsettled legal status of Taiwan. Here is an excerpt of the dialogues between Kissinger and Chou En-lai on October 21, 1971:
Chou: “the question is, we demand that other resolutions include the restoration of the seat and all legal powers of the PRC in the UN. The (Albanian) Resolution could not include a clause to refer to the status of Taiwan; and even if the resolution was passed, the status of Taiwan would be unsettled.?
Kissinger: “Even the Albanian Resolution is so?
Chou: “There is that danger. Obviously, the countries supporting the Resolution had not pondered this question.?
The so-called “other resolutions?were other proposals other than the US’s. In fact, they meant “the Albanian Resolution?because many proposals were combined into just one—the Albanian Resolution.
The clause for the status of Taiwan could not have been placed because if “Taiwan is part of the PRC?had been specified, the issue would have been debated and voted on, and the resolution would not have been passed. For the PRC, if countries supporting the Albanian Resolution had noticed that the resolution was to settle the legal status of Taiwan, it would have been a very thorny issue. Therefore, Chou repeatedly asked Kissinger that the US not brings up the issue of Taiwan’s legal status.
Kissinger asked: ?Even the Albanian Resolution is so??It indicated he did not notice this important question at all.
All countries, supporting or opposing the Albanian Resolution, neglected this point. Therefore, Chou successfully expelled Chiang regime as the issue of the Taiwan status was not debated. However, if Chiang regime had decidedly given up its permanent seat in the Security Council, Chou would not have succeeded.
The US had to take some responsibility on this point. Chiang Kai-shek had realized early on that the loss of the permanent seat in the Security Council was inevitable and keeping a seat in the UN was all-important. But because he would have to take the responsibility for abandoning its long-held position, he had chosen to be silent. But the US believed that the ROC was the legitimate government of China and accordingly it proposed two resolutions: one was to regard expulsion as an “important question?under Charter Article 18—the so-called “Important Question Resolution? the other was to recognize the PRC as the legitimate representative of China and a permanent member of the Security Council while recognizing the ROC’s retention of the UN membership—the so-called “Dual Representation Resolution.?At the General Assembly, the first resolution was voted out and the Albanian Resolution was passed, preventing the “Dual Representation Resolution?from entering the agenda. Even if US resolutions had been passed, Chiang regime’s UN membership would have doomed to failure.
Not only did the US have diplomatic relations with the ROC, but also a security treaty to defend Taiwan. The US said to Chiang regime that if the Albanian Resolution was passed it was only a matter of time that diplomatic relations and security treaty would be revoked. This was US threat to force Chiang regime to give up its permanent seat in the Security Council and Chiang regime could not but succumb. In reality, Chiang’s foreign minister Chou Shu-kai had warned at a meeting on September 13 before he left for the UN General Assembly sessions that “it was extremely important for us to stay in the UN. As long as we stay in the UN, the PRC may not enter the UN; even if it enters the UN, we still have to stay in the UN.?The United Daily News editorialized on September 15 that “the UN is an extremely important asset for us and we should try to hang on to it for we could not find a second UN.?Naturally, the newspaper would not have dared to say that if the absolute dictator Chiang had not approved it. The US government should have been more attentive to Taiwan’s domestic politics. Unfortunately, Washington had not done that. Even today this is still the case.
5.Under the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), Taiwan Cannot Establish Itself a Sovereign and Democratic Country
According to international law, the legal status of Taiwan and the Pescadores that were the territories of Japan became unsettled when the San Francisco Peace Treaty took effect on April 28, 1952. The passage of the Albanian Resolution by the UN General Assembly on October 25, 1971 reaffirmed that the legal status of Taiwan and the Pescadores was unsettled.
No one can deny the fact that Taiwan does exist as a country. Comparing with some 190 member countries of the UN, Taiwan has a population of 23 million, ranking 41st, and has a territory of 36,000 square kilometers, larger than 21 small countries combined. Per capita GDP of Taiwan is about US$13,000, ranking 25th in the world. Besides, it has directly elected its president and members of the congress, an indication of a sovereign and democratic country.
However, because Taiwan is still using the constitution of the ROC, a country that is regarded by the international community as non-existing, Taiwan’s international legal status is unsettled even today. According to international law, no country is sovereign if its legal status is unsettled and thus is not qualified to become a member of an international organization, which requires sovereignty. This question can be solved only when Taiwan international legal status is settled.
Some believe that the signatory countries of the San Francisco Peace Treaty have the right to decide Taiwan’s legal status. However, this concept is outdated. International law such as the UN Charter recognizes the right to self-determination and reaffirmed at the General Assembly in 1966. The two International Human Rights Covenants, which took effect in 1976, the International Covenant of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, also clearly specify the right to self-determination in their opening articles.
Article 1 of these Covenants specifies, “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development.?The right to self-determination is “mother of all rights?and that is why it is specified in the opening clauses. Only the people on Taiwan have the right to determine Taiwan’s political status. The people of Taiwan have long exercised the sovereign right and when they exercise this right to make a constitution for Taiwan and abandon the ROC Constitution, Taiwan’s legal status is thereby firmly established.
That is to say, the people of Taiwan who have the right to self-determination may determine the unsettled status for Taiwan. However, this does not mean that Taiwan is independent. There is no question of independence, since Taiwan has not been ruled by any other country.
Taiwan independence movement has customarily used the term Taiwan independence and caused misunderstanding. Taiwan does not have to separate from other country to be independent. Chiang regime became a UN member as a temporary military occupier of Taiwan and later illegally made Taiwan a part of the ROC. Taiwan independence movement has regarded Chiang regime as a colonial regime. Taiwan independence movement was initiated as an anti-colonial movement in the early 1960’s because at the time many former colonies fervently advocated independence and anti-Chiang movement was called Taiwan independence movement. Since Chiang regime had lost its international legal status, Taiwan independence movement did not see the ROC as a sovereign country. Therefore, Taiwan independence is not to separate from the ROC, but from a colonial regime called the ROC.
As Taiwan became democratized, the colonial regime of the ROC collapsed. However, as long as the ROC Constitution still exists, Taiwan cannot be a sovereign country in international law and a true democracy. The fundamental principle of democracy requires that people rule. That is to say, in a true democracy, people adhere to the laws they directly make or indirectly made by their representatives.
In his campaign platform for the presidency, Chen Shui-bian said that he would make a new constitution through referendum. If this promise is materialized, Taiwan can be a sovereign country in international law and a true democracy. A sovereign and democratic Taiwan is consistent with US national interests and instrumental to the peace and security in the Asia Pacific region.
According to international law, all sovereign countries are recognized to have independence and equality. Independence means the right to participate in international community. Equality means equal treatment in the international community regardless of the size of the country. Therefore, no matter how small a country is, it can be recognized by all countries of the world and join international organizations headed by the UN.
If Taiwan is a sovereign country, it can engage in diplomatic relations with all other countries on equal footing and participate in all international organizations. Therefore, no matter how hard the PRC attempts to block Taiwan, it cannot impede Taiwan from entering international community. Although the Security Council has to recommend the admission of membership in the UN, and the PRC can use its veto to obstruct Taiwan, if the PRC repeatedly uses the veto to block Taiwan, it would be severely criticized by the international community and more countries would sympathize with Taiwan. Eventually, the PRC would let Taiwan enter the UN.
6.The Taiwan Relations Act Encourages the Abolition of the Republic of China
It is difficult to imagine that the US government would press Taiwan to refrain from changing the status quo under any circumstances if it understands Taiwan’s domestic affairs. From the 1971 incidents, one can see that the US government does not understand Taiwan’s domestic situation. Kissinger had a dozen meetings with Chou En-lai and not once did he mention about Taiwan’s domestic affairs. Later, the same was the case with President Nixon. At the time, the US government thought nothing but the Vietnam and the Soviet questions and paid no attention to the existence of Taiwanese people under political white terror.
In 1978, the US was negotiating with the PRC on normalization of relations when the cold war was at its height. In April 1978, civil war broke out in Afghanistan and the Soviets could not control it. At the end of the following year, Soviet troops went into Afghanistan and the conflicts between the PRC and Vietnam escalated. In November 1978, the Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a friendship treaty. In April 1979, the PRC informed the Soviet Union to repeal the Sino-Soviet Alliance Treaty. In Poland, anti-Soviet labor movement heightened and in September 1980 Independent Labor Self-Governing Union established the “Solidarity Union,?leading to the collapse of the Soviet-led communist bloc in Eastern Europe.
Under these volatile international situations, the US and the PRC established quasi-diplomatic relations and continued to conduct secret normalization deals on the basis of mutual interest. On December 16, 1979, the two countries issued a joint communiqu?to announce that the two countries would establish normal diplomatic relations on January 1 the following year. Naturally, the Chiang Ching-kuo regime was the first to receive its impact. To prevent social unrests in Taiwan, Chiang placed Taiwan under severe martial law and cancelled the elections for national representatives slated for December 23. On January 1, 1979, the US government issued a notice to sever diplomatic relations with the ROC and to abolish the security treaty. In the US, some harshly criticized the US for abandoning Taiwan. The Carter Administration indicated that the US would continue arms sales to Taiwan, but nothing about Taiwan’s security after the abolition of the treaty or how to protect Taiwan. Apparently the Carter Administration thought nothing about these matters. On the contrary, US Congress was seriously pondering new policies. On April 10, 1979, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) with the objectives “to help maintain peace, security and stability in the Western Pacific; and to promote the foreign policy of the US by authorizing the continuation of commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the US and the people on Taiwan.?It is clearly stated, “the US decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means.?Furthermore, the TRA also clearly states, the US considers “any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the US;?“The US will provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and maintain the capacity of the US to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.”TRA clearly reveals US Congress?intention to maintain close substantive relations with Taiwan and to assure the security of Taiwan after the severance of diplomatic relations and the abolition of the security treaty. Many US Administration’s policies were made under congressional pressure. For example, on the eve of Taiwan’s first direct election for the president, the PRC launched missiles in the waters nears Taiwan to intimidate Taiwan’s people; but under congressional pressure pro-China President Clinton was forced to dispatch two aircraft carriers to the waters near Taiwan as a warning to the PRC.
There is a human rights clause in the TRA stating, “Nothing contained in this Act shall contravene the interest of the US in human rights, especially with respect to the human rights of all the approximately 18 million inhabitants of Taiwan. The preservation and enhancement of the human rights of all the people on Taiwan are hereby reaffirmed as objectives of the US.?US Congress has used this clause to directly assist with the promotion of democratization in Taiwan. In September 1986, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was formed at the time when martial law was still in effect and no political party was allowed to form. It was highly likely that the new party would have been forbidden. In May 1986, five members of Congress—Kennedy, Pell, Solarz, Leach, and Torricelli formed the Committee for Taiwan’s Democratization urging Chiang Ching-kuo to lift martial law, to allow formation of political parties, and to reelect national representatives. In June, the Subcommittees on Asia Pacific Affairs and on Human Rights of the International Affairs of the US House of Representatives jointly passed a Taiwan democracy resolution, urging the Chiang regime to permit formation of new political parties, to ban censure, to protect freedoms of publication, assembly, and association, and to implement sound representative democracy. All these congressional actions helped the successful formation of the DPP and the process of Taiwan’s democratization.
It was clear that the TRA was so enacted in the interest of the Taiwanese people, not of the ruling Chiang regime. It is particularly worth noting,“The governing authorities on Taiwan recognized by the United States as the Republic of China prior to January1,1979,and any successor governing authorities.”The so-called the governing authorities to inherit the ROC government can be interpreted as an encouragement to Taiwanese people to erect a democratic republic of Taiwan to replace the ROC system with which the US was compelled to sever diplomatic relations. It was rather surprising that a US law that truly understood and sympathized with the interest of the people of Taiwan could have been enacted. It was partly due to the efforts of the activists in Taiwan independence movement in the US. Some of the activists returned to Taiwan after the “blacklist?was lifted and now become prominent in many fields in Taiwan. However, most of those congressmen and women who participated in the process of the TRA had since retired, and US Congress has rather light relations with Taiwanese Americans at the present time.
The TRA has taught us about the operating process of US congress. The US government is busy dealing with many issues in the world and has little time to understand the domestic issues of various countries. In December 2003, US President Bush met with PRC’s premier Win Chia-bao; at the press conference Bush said that he was opposed to Taiwan leaders?statements or actions to change the status quo. This statement caused a great deal of crisis to Chen Shui-bian’s reelection. Fortunately, Chen was successfully reelected. If a pro-unification candidate had been elected, Taiwan would have faced crises and the peace and security in the East Asia and Pacific region would have been endangered, even threatening the fundamental national interests of Japan and the US. Apparently Bush was too mindful about the problems in Iraq and North Korea, making him too pacified towards the PRC, and not thinking much about the Taiwan issue.
7.PRC’s Ambitions and the Realities
The world before World War Two had many powerful empires possessing many colonies or vassal states, unlike today in which the US predominates with a vast and rich land. After the defeat in the war, Japan and Germany lost their colonies or vassal states. However, they were freed from many unnecessary burdens and able to develop their economies. The victorious Great Britain and France were faced with independence movements in the colonies, realizing that colonialism would have more disadvantages. They decided to let go the colonies and concentrated on developing their economies. For capitalist countries, imperialism was out of date after World War Two.
After the war, the Soviet Union and China were the only two countries that were attempting to expand their territories. Despite its expansion in Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union collapsed after its defeat in the cold war. Judging from the world trend, one can say that military power based imperialism is thing of the past. Only the PRC is blind to this trend and still pursuing an imperialistic policy like its ancient Chinese predecessors.
All ancient Chinese dynasties pursued a unified world (Tien Hsia) as their ultimate goals. For Chinese, Tien Hsia means the Chinese mainland plus the peripheral regions. When the peripheral countries submitted to the emperor who ruled the continent and paid regular tributes to the emperor, the work of ruling Tien Hsia was completed. The PRC possesses the greatest territory in Chinese history and seems to have reached the ultimate goal in its territorial ambition. Chinese people are agriculturally oriented and rarely paid any attention to the maritime, yet they are now trying to expand their territorial waters and cherishing maritime resources more and more. According to its Territorial Waters Law, the PRC embraces most of the East Sea including the Senkaku Islands, the South Sea and the waters surrounding the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Taiwan. The main reason that the PRC has been so adamant in annexing Taiwan is to possess the economic power of Taiwan. Taiwan has a population only one-sixtieth of the PRC’s, yet its GDP is over one-quarter of the PRC’s. If the PRC annexes Taiwan, it would have Taiwan’s technologies and capitals. Another reason is that if the PRC annexes Taiwan, the South Sea will be PRC’s internal water and the countries in the region will become its vassal states.
However, unlike a country, which is linked to a continent, Taiwan is difficult to occupy. Neither Napoleon nor Hitler was able to conquer because of the 34 square kilometer Dover Channel. The Taiwan Strait is three times larger than Dover Channel. Unless Taiwan is totally stripped of its defense capabilities, it is impossible to cross the Taiwan Strait and occupy Taiwan. According to public opinion polls, 87% of Taiwan people believe that “if the PRC attacks Taiwan, they will come to the defense of Taiwan.?How can the will of Taiwan people’s be defeated?
If the PRC attacks Taiwan with nuclear weapons, Taiwan may be stripped of its defense capabilities. However, this would seem an unlikely option because if the PRC elects to do so it will become public enemy number of the entire world. Attacking Taiwan with traditional bombardments and missiles will not defeat Taiwan either. The PRC has 550 short range missiles aimed at Taiwan with a total of 500 tons of explosives. It is said that NATO allies used a total of 11,500 tons of explosives on Kosovo, 23 times of PRC’s missiles. In 1958, PRC fired over 500,000 canon shots to attack Quemoy.
Taiwan will naturally not sit idle when the PRC attacks. The US will be obliged by the TRA to coordinate with Taiwan to take counter measures including military actions. At least, the PRC will face US economic sanctions. Furthermore, if war breaks out in the Taiwan Strait, investments flowing into the PRC will stop, which will be devastating to PRC’s economic development or even collapsing the economy. For the PRC, this is suicidal.
What about naval blockade against Taiwan? Teng Shiao-pin once said, “Although the PRC has no capability to occupy Taiwan, it can impose naval blockade against Taiwan.?To a trade oriented country Taiwan, sea-lanes are its lifelines. If Teng were right, Taiwan would be finished. There are two ways to conduct naval blockade: one is to attack ships coming in and out of harbors and the other is to block the harbors.
To attack foreign ships is to declare war. If US ships are attacked, it is a declaration of war on the US; if the British ships are attacked, it is a declaration of war on Great Britain. Rationally speaking, the PRC would not do such a thing. Even if Taiwanese ships cannot move, Taiwan’s trade is not much impacted. Therefore, this will not work for the PRC.With what the PRC has, the only sensible way for it to do is to mine the Kaoshiung and Keelung Harbors. If placed too deep, the mining is useless; if too far from the harbors, foreign ships may be inflicted. Thus, the mining areas are limited. For the defense side, focusing on certain areas for prevention and de-mining will do the job. Therefore, naval blockade not only will fail to work, but will also be condemned by the international community like missile attack. In short, naval blockade is nothing but frequently used threat.
The PRC has never ceased to intimidate and threaten Taiwan. So far, Taiwan has had three presidential elections and each time the PRC threatened to initiate war against Taiwan if a pro-independence candidate was elected. The PRC has failed to carry out its threats. One can say that PRC’s threats are psychological warfare and as long as Taiwanese people do not submit to them, the PRC will not win.
For Taiwan, the real crisis comes when the PRC has military capabilities that can strip Taiwanese people of their determination to defend themselves. Taiwan’s security depends on its own defense capabilities and US support. However, as PRC’s economy continues to develop and its military force continues to increase, eventually the PRC will have the capabilities. At that time, the PRC will surround Taiwan with its naval forces and attack Taiwan with its air force and missiles. When the PRC has those capabilities, it would mean that it has capabilities to harm the US as well. Chinese military has said, “the US will unlikely sacrifice Los Angeles or San Francisco to defend Taiwan.?
If the PRC indeed become such a military power and threaten that “if Taiwan does not accept unification it will use force; and if the US intervenes, it will attack US cities and US bases in Japan.?Obviously, the public in the US and Japan will oppose intervention. Does this mean Taiwan will have to surrender?
US-Japan security pact aims to main peace and security in the Asia Pacific regions. If Taiwan is attacked by the PRC, this security network will crumble and the Taiwan Strait and the South Sea will become PRC’s internal waters; many countries in these regions will become PRC’s vassal states in effect. When the PRC becomes a hegemonic power, the US can choose to move back to Hawaii, but what about Japan? Isolated in East Asia, Japan may be forced to become a PRC vassal state. To avoid such a tragedy, it is necessary to embrace Taiwan in an international security system that can prevent PRC’s attack.
8.Taiwanese People Do not Succumb to Chinese Intimidation and American Pressure
The PRC has acted as if it had the right to use force against Taiwan, frequently intimidating Taiwan. International law prohibits threat or use of force in settling international relations. However, the international community has not taken sanctions against the PRC. The PRC claims that Taiwan is a part of the PRC and the Taiwan issue is a domestic issue of the PRC. The claim is against international law. The only excuse for the PRC is the UN General Assembly #2758 Resolution in 1971, which implies that the ROC represented by the Chiang Kai-shek regime ceased to exist when the PRC inherited it. After the expulsion from the UN, the Chiang regime on Taiwan still insisted that it was the legitimate representative of China and some day it would recover the Chinese mainland. Thus, from the PRC’s point of view, Taiwan is an insurgent and the state has the right to suppress the insurgent; the international community has no right to interfere with or criticize the PRC’s threat to use force against Taiwan.
On April 30, 1991, acting on the resolution of the National Assembly, President Lee Teng-hui declared the end of civil war. However, pro-unification forces within the Kuomintang (the Nationalist Party) worked to make the ROC National Unification Council pass the following resolution on August 1, 1992:
“Both sides on the Taiwan Strait insist on the principle of “one China?with different interpretations. The PRC considers “one China?as the PRC and in the future when unification is achieved Taiwan will be a special administrative region. The ROC considers “one China?as the ROC that has existed since its founding in 1912 with sovereignty over entire China, but currently its governing authority covers only Taiwan, the Pescadores, Quemoy, and Matsu. Taiwan is part of China, so is the Chinese mainland.?br />
This resolution in effect means the PRC’s territory covers Taiwan and the ROC’s territory covers the Chinese mainland. In other words, under the “one China?principle, each side claims the other side as part of its territory. Thus, Chinese civil war continues. As long as Taiwan hangs on to the “one China?principle, the PRC has the right to use force against Taiwan. This is why the PRC has insisted that Taiwan accept this principle. On July 9, 1997, the outgoing President Lee Teng-hui declared the relations between the PRC and the ROC as a “country to country relationship, at least a special country to country relationship,?in order to break the impasse. This is the so-called “two country theory,?with a purpose to legalize the reality that the ROC’s territory does not cover the Chinese mainland so as to break through the “one China?principle. The PRC fanatically criticized President Lee and continually conducted large-scale amphibious exercises with Taiwan as the target. US President Clinton was shocked and sent a special envoy to warn President Lee not to provoke the PRC. On the eve of presidential election in 2000, the PRC released a “White Paper on the “one China?principle and the Taiwan Question,?saying,
“PRC government believes that Lee’s “two country theory,?is a more dangerous step to pass all laws in Taiwan to divide China and a serious challenge to the goal of unification. If this conspiracy is successful, China will never be unified.? One can take this statement to mean that if Taiwan legalizes the relationship between the PRC and Taiwan, the PRC will not have the right to intimidate and threaten Taiwan and unification will not be possible. If this is the case, there will be no peace in the Taiwan Strait and the world. This clearly contravenes the national interest of the US, and yet US President did not stop PRC’s threat against Taiwan.
During the presidential election campaign in March 2003, the PRC intimidated pro-independence forces in Taiwan that if Chen Shui-bian was reelected, a war was inevitable. The threat did not work and Chen was reelected. However, Chen’s victory was due to the division within the KMT—James Song won 36.84% of the votes and Len Chan won 23.1%. Chen won only 39.3%. In the legislature, the opposition still commands an overwhelming majority. Chen’s presidency is still a very weak one. With this situation and under US pressure, in his inaugural address, President Chen stated that under the condition that the PRC will not use force against Taiwan he will not (1) declare Taiwan independence; (2) change national title; (3) promote entrenchment of the “two country theory?in the constitution; (4) promote change of status quo through referendum; and (5) there is no question of abolishing the National Unification Guideline and the National Unification Council.
President Chen chose to take a soft position towards the PRC and urged dialogues between the two sides. However, the PRC ignored him. Many DPP supporters criticized him for taking a much weaker position than that of KMT’s Lee Teng-hui. On August 3, 2002, perhaps in response to the criticism, Chen said, “Taiwan and the PRC are two countries on the Taiwan Strait. The future of Taiwan and the change of status quo cannot be unilaterally decided by any one country, government, political party, or individual. Only the 23 million people on Taiwan have the right to determine Taiwan’s future, fate, and status quo. I sincerely hope and urge that we seriously think about the importance and urgency of passing a referendum law.?For the first time, President Chen mentioned the possibility of changing the status quo through a referendum. Despite PRC’s vehement attack on this “one country one each side of the Strait theory,?Chen continues to repeat it.
In February 2003, two fierce rivals in the previous presidential election, James Song and Len Chan, announced their pairing for the March 2004 presidential election. For the KMT that had monopolized Taiwan for over 50 years, 4 years of opposition experience was enough. So this time around, a victory was a must. James Song who won more votes than Len in the previous election humbled himself to be the vice presidential candidate. DPP nominated Chen Shui-bian and Annette Lu as its candidates.
A united pro-unification ticket made the presidential race a duel between the pro-independence and the pro-unification forces. Pro-unification’s position was that the one China was the ROC, so the ROC system must be preserved. Pro-independence’s position emphasized the reality that the PRC and Taiwan were two independent countries, so Taiwan must affirm itself as a sovereign country. On September 28, 2003, 17th anniversary of the DPP, President Chen announced that in 2006 a new Taiwan constitution will be born through referendum and in 2008 the new constitution will take effect. If this is materialized, a sovereign and independent Taiwan will be born and Taiwan will be a new democratic country.
Pro-unification force criticized Chen for making a Taiwan independence schedule and this policy will provoke PRC’s invasion. The PRC also intimidated that Taiwan independence will be crushed with whatever it takes. The criticism and the intimidation raised Chen’s popularity. Ironically, the PRC that insisted the Taiwan issue was a Chinese domestic issue asked the US to intervene in Taiwan’s presidential election. The US obliged since the US needed PRC’s assistance on the North Korea and the Iraq issues. On December 9, at the press conference after US President Bush met with PRC’s premier Win Chia-bao, Bush said that the US is opposed to any unilateral decision on the part of the PRC or Taiwan to change the status quo. The US is also opposed to unilateral statement or action by Taiwan’s leader to change the status quo. Pro-unification force took this opportunity to repeat its crisis theory that even the US was opposed to Chen and if Chen were reelected, the PRC would invade Taiwan.
Taiwan’s defense depends on the US for arms sales; Bush’s talk was a blow to Chen. On December 29, the Japanese government followed US footstep to say that Chen’s statements on new constitution and referendum had jeopardized Taiwan/Japan relations and the Japanese government was gravely concerned. In the past, such serious developments would have cost Chen’s chance for reelection. But this time around, it was different. On February 28, the 57th anniversary of KMT’s massacre of some 30,000 Taiwanese, more than 2.2 million people came out for “hand-in-hand to protect Taiwan?campaign, showing their despite for PRC’s threat, shouting “Taiwan Yes, China No.?
On March 20, Chen/Lu ticket won the election by a small margin. It was a minute 0.228% increase over the last election, but it signaled where the people of Taiwan wanted to go. The 228 “hand-in-hand to protect Taiwan?campaign was an apparent key reason for the victory. The winning margin was so small and the pressure from the PRC, the pro-unification force, and the US government was so strong that the victory was almost a miracle.
On May 20, in his inaugural address. President Chen changed his promise to make a new constitution to revise the ROC Constitution and repeated his “Four Nos and One Won’t?in the previous inaugural speech. The US government was satisfied with the speech. It was said that the US government censored the speech.
There is a world of difference between making a new constitution and revising the ROC Constitution. No matter how much the ROC Constitution is revised, as long as it still exists, Taiwan cannot be a sovereign and true democratic country and the PRC shall continue to have the right to intimidate Taiwan.
The US wants Taiwan to maintain the abnormal status left by Chiang Kai-shek and caused by its own misguided strategy in 1971. This means that the US has no strategy to solve the Taiwan question. The US must come to realize that before the PRC acquires capabilities to invade Taiwan, the status of Taiwan must be normalized.
9. A Wish for the Success of Making a New Taiwan Constitution
There is no other way to make Taiwan an equal member of the international community and to assure peace and security for Taiwan than to make a new Taiwan constitution. Only with a new constitution can Taiwan break through the obstacles to get into the international community and find a path to permanent existence. As President Chen said, no single government, political party, or individual can dominate the making of a new constitution. Only the people of Taiwan have the right and the ability to make the new constitution.
Under the leadership of former President Lee Teng-hui, a movement for the new constitution got under way on July 1, aiming at gathering the will of the people to achieve this goal. The people of Taiwan must understand the following points:
1. For a long time, Taiwan has been excluded from the international community and the PRC has repeatedly intimidated and threatened Taiwan with use of force. This is an abnormity that is unacceptable to the international community; it is not Taiwan’s fate. Yet, many people do not realize it. The first task is to break this myth. Taiwan is responsible for this myth and Taiwan itself has to undo it.
2. The international community and international law recognize that in 1971 when the PRC inherited the ROC, the later ceased to exist. Therefore, as long as the ROC Constitution is still in effect, Taiwan cannot join the international community and cannot stop the PRC from intimidation and threat.
3. Only the people of Taiwan have the right to make a new constitution for themselves. Democracy means laws made directly by the sovereign people or indirectly by their representative must be obeyed. Therefore, as long as the ROC Constitution that was not by the sovereign people on Taiwan exists on Taiwan, legally speaking, Taiwan is not a democratic country. For the sake of democracy, it is necessary to have a new Taiwan constitution.
4. The right of self-determination is a fundamental human right. To make a new Taiwan constitution is an exercise of the right of self-determination, which will be respected and supported by the international community.
If the people of Taiwan understand these points, it is not difficult to make a new Taiwan constitution. If this is clearly explained to the international community, the people of the world will support a new Taiwan constitution.
Finally, let’s wish the success for a new Taiwan constitution.
|
|---|
|
|
|
