Quote:
Originally Posted by tiancai
I'm interested in hearing people's opinions about the recent decision by Taiwan to "cease" applying the Guidelines for National Unification, and the "cessation" of its National Unification Council (NUC). There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings about the issue in the international media (e.g., the semantics used to describe the NUC's new status, and the tendancy paint Taiwan as the bad guy through gross oversimplification of Chen Shui-bian's aims and policies). Is the media wrong to characterize this issue as a serious provokation on the part of Taiwan, or could this indeed lead to military conflict? Does it constitute a unilateral change in the status quo? Is this indeed a move toward independence?
The way I see it, the NUC was of questionable legality to begin with (its establishment was never formally approved by Taiwan's legislature), and has existed in name only over the past six years. Since that time, Taiwan has moved on, passing the 2003 referendum law (whose importance to the overall situation is woefully underappreciated, IMHO) that basically erases any chances of a "back-room unification deal". The NUC's prejudice toward the ultimate goal of unification with China is now not only out of step with popular opinion (a recent poll showed something like 87% of the public prefer having a voice in Taiwan's future status), it's legally impossible, thanks to the referendum law.
As to the questions I posed above, I really don't think the "cessation" of the NUC can be considered a big enough issue to prompt Beijing into military action. Given its fundamental irrelevance to Taiwan's cross-strait policies, I definitely don't think the move changes the status quo as much as some would want to believe. Taiwan is well within its right to continue refining its democracy, and getting rid of dead weight like the NUC seems like a sensible enough place to start.
Finally, the "cessation" of the NUC has nothing to do with independence. As I said before, the ability to decide Taiwan's ultimate status (either unification or independence) now lies in the hands of the electorate thanks to the referendum law, making any unilateral change to Taiwan's status impossible. So why are there so many media reports tying the NUC decision to some wild-eyed Taiwan independence conspiracy?
|
If we read the history carefully, Taiwan belongs to China and is part of China. The ultimate reason why Taiwan denied is due to the communism regime. Whether NUC will provide a mean of declaring war or not, it is simply the political games of both DPP and KMT to win the polls. Taiwan leaders only care for election and their supremacy over the country so that they could continue to gain their personal interest in terms of power or wealth.
Why people like us from the rest of the world concern on this matter? Simply because we have our personal agenda as well. We do not wish to see war between Taiwan and China as this will greatly affect the global economy and may lead to world war 3 if US intervene.
In reality, China can simply block the economy and the water region of Taiwan without war. THis could have pushed Taiwan to dead end and if Taiwan reiterate, China will have the excuse to conduct full military war against Taiwan.
That's why China love DPP than KMT where the likelihood of DPP to declare inependence is much higher than KMT and allow China to carry out the anti-cessation law of its sovereign.
I tend to suspect DPP members are more pro-china than KMT currently