A Primer for Cross-Strait Relations

'The biggest problem for Taiwan created by the 1971 framework for cross-strait relations is its continued claim to sovereignty over China.'

China has on several occasions recently tried to sabotage Taiwan's official membership status in the WTO. The pressure it puts on Taiwan's room to maneuver internationally is repeated and clear evidence that cross-strait relations are not warming, and that China's stance towards Taiwan is not softening. In this situation, Taipei should seriously consider changing its foreign policy and depart from the 1971 framework for cross-strait relations.

A review of the development of cross-strait relations shows that the withdrawal by the Republic of China (ROC) from the UN in 1971 was an important watershed. It has had a major influence on the ensuing cross-strait relationship, making it difficult for Taiwan to extract itself from the mire of "one country, two systems."

Prior to the ROC's 1971 withdrawal from the UN, our nation represented all of China in the UN and other international organizations. The government on Taiwan also claimed sovereignty over all China. In the atmosphere of the Cold War, Taiwan, with the support of the US and some European nations, was the legal representative government of all China for 22 years. Following the UN's rejection of Taiwan's right to represent China in 1971, China has been represented by the government in Beijing.

Our Constitution remains unchanged and continues to claim sovereignty over all China. In other words, the claims of Beijing and Taipei overlap. The international community, however, only recognizes one government per nation. Since the UN has already decided that the government in Beijing represents all China, Taiwan obviously cannot represent all China. Given this situation, a majority of nations around the world also recognize Beijing as the representative of all China. Be it in the UN or in the international community [in general], the government in Beijing is recognized as the representative of China.

Although Taiwan cannot be described as a local government under the government of China, it is in reality difficult for it not to be seen as part of the Chinese government in accordance with international law.

If Taiwan wanted to once again represent China, being a tiny little island, it would be displaying an inability to assess its own strength. Not only that, but it would also be ignoring the realities of international politics. Because the foreign policy of KMT governments after the UN rejection of Taiwan's right to represent China has been to persistently claim to be the representative of China -- the so-called "one China, with each side having its own interpretation" -- and because national sovereignty has not been redefined by constitutional amendment, Taiwan has come to be seen by the international community as a "political entity" belonging to that one China.

In the past, we have accepted the fuzzy expression "political entity" as being appropriate and correct, even though we all know that this policy slowly has pushed us towards China's "one country, two systems" framework.

In all international activities where Beijing does not object to Taiwanese participation, Taiwan participates under the name "Chinese Taipei." Foreigners don't differentiate between "Chinese Taipei" and "Taipei, China." Using "Chinese Taipei" is merely a matter of [Taiwanese] finding consolation in the belief that it is different from "Taipei, China."

We must note, however, that, internationally speaking, "Chinese Taipei" does not denote a sovereign body, and this is something we actually have accepted repeatedly in various international organizations. Maybe we have been too eager for international participation in the past, thinking that participation at any cost is fine and ignoring the name under which we achieve this participation. There is, however, a kind of "inertia" particular to the international community -- if you use a name for a long period of time, other nations will require that you keep using that name. "Chinese Taipei" is an example of this.

There is another issue which we have to face head on -- the issue of why China keeps interfering with our name use and our status. The reason is simple. Because the sovereignty claimed by the governments in Beijing and Taipei overlap, and because the international community recognizes the government in Beijing as representing China, that government has the right to interfere in Taiwan's activities, which is seen by Beijing as a local government.

Turning the issue on its head -- under what circumstances won't Beijing interfere with Taiwan's activities? The government in Beijing would not be in a position to interfere when Taiwan is a separate soverign nation enjoying the rights and privleges of legitimate persons recognized on the international stage. Let's use the entry into the UN by both East and West Germany in 1973 and both North and South Korea in 1992 as an example. The two Germanies and the two Koreas were declared separate countries with different governmental jurisdictions. Official issues such as mutual boycotts of each other's name and representative rights have never occurred.

The biggest problem for Taiwan created by the 1971 framework for cross-strait relations is its continued claim to sovereignty over China. For some people, equating the ROC with all China is an important part of their nostalgia for their homeland, and this is something we should sympathize with and understand. But holding on to this nostalgia while ignoring reality will create far-reaching problems.

Taking a look at the real world, no one today entertains the idea that Taiwan has the power to fight its way back to China or take over China. For people who used to think so, traveling to their old home is no longer a distant dream, since they now are free to do so. Most people in favor of unification are exercizing their freedom, thanks to Taiwan's democratic system, to hold any political position they so desire. But if you told them to go live in China, they might not be so willing to be a part of China. Beijing doesn't necessarily place any trust in these proponents of unification since it involves sensitive political issues and issues of political exploitation.

There are many systemic, civilizational and cultural differences between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Unification would be no easy matter. Maybe we should take a direct look at the issue of what substantive advantages and benefits unification would bring us, what disadvantages and harm abandoning unification would bring, and whether abandoning unification would lead to disaster.

Should we, then, go on waiting, hoping that the systems on each side of the Taiwan Strait will gradually converge so that unification can be achieved 50 years or more into the future? Our political elite has spent much time arguing over the issue of Taiwan's international status. Unable to make their minds up, the members of the elite keep going in circles, making this controversy the most longstanding and omnipresent issue in Taiwanese life. It is a fact that we can't make our minds up due to the extent of the dispute, but it seems the political leaders of our nation should be more daring and resolute in leading the public down the road of stability.

Regardless of why the old Taiwanese left the old country, they remain nostalgic for it in their hearts. But once in their new home in Taiwan, regardless of when they immigrated, they made a promise to work together for this land. Building a new home must have been the common ideal of our forefathers as they left the old country. Their situation was the same as those of the people coming to Taiwan after 1949, from broken homes in the old country, worthy of sympathy.

Those of the later immigrants that stay on in Taiwan have surely grown to like this place, and their decision to stay on should be welcomed by the earlier immigrants. Not only does this increase the island's work force, but old and new Taiwanese work to temper each other, and oppose invaders and create a beautiful home together. The year 1949 lies more than half a century in the past, and the second and third generations [of those later immigrants] are getting rooted in Taiwan. They interact well with the Taiwanese whose ancestors came earlier, so this should be the right time to consider Taiwan's direction.

Based on this, we hope that the later and earlier immigrants will stand together, and work together to find a new direction for Taiwan.

Even though the government abolished the temporary provisions effective during the period of communist rebellion in 1991, it is only a declaration recognizing the government in Beijing as a political entity and doesn't solve the problem of Taiwan's sovereignty. If we want a place in the international community, we must respect international norms.

Making the quest for sovereignty over a single country and one single government our goals while avoiding a sovereignty overlap with China, we must amend the 1971 framework for cross-strait relations.