Myths about China-Taiwan reunification

Asia Times ^ | 01.16.04 | Daniel McCarthy

[Dr. Marten]

Myths about China-Taiwan reunification
By Daniel McCarthy

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

Many myths about the China-Taiwan disagreement have appeared in the press lately, particularly in the Western media. Inaccurate statements in the People's Republic of China (PRC) media can be attributed to political propaganda, and inaccurate statements in the Hong Kong media can be attributed to either political propaganda or to taking sides. But inaccurate statements about the China-Taiwan disagreement in the Western press usually can be attributed to the effectiveness of PRC propaganda.

Dispelling the three main myths:

Myth 1: There is only one China and Taiwan is part of it
As articulated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the so-called one-China policy goes something like this: "There is only one China in the world. Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. All references to China shall mean the People's Republic of China."

On the one hand, the CCP tells us that all references to China mean the People's Republic of China, the PRC, but on the other hand, the CCP talks about 5,000 years of Chinese history. That would lead to the inane conclusion that Emperor Qin Shihuang, who first united China 2,500 years ago, was really the emperor of the People's Republic of China that was established in 1949.

Even skipping past that logical problem, the one-China policy advocates would have us believe that the People's Republic of China (mainland) and the Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) are one nation. Certainly black can be white if we define it as such, but can black and white both be red? Anyone with open eyes can see that Taiwan is not part of the People's Republic of China, and vice versa, so the only logical conclusion is that there are two countries in the world called China. Or are there?

In 1999, US Secretary of State Colin Powell alluded to China as being a geographic region. It follows that within the geographic region called China, there are two nations: The PRC and ROC. The PRC would like to ignore that Mongolia is a third nation that was once part of China, but perhaps this semantic problem is confusing enough without bringing Mongolia into it.

So again on the one hand, we are faced with a one-China policy that makes absolutely no sense and is internally contradictory. On the other hand, if we use the word "China" to denote the geographic region in which the PRC and ROC are located, then a one-China policy may not be so offensive. We could also adopt a one-North America policy, a one-Europe policy, and so on.

The one-China myth can ultimately be dispelled in one of two ways. Either China is a country called the People's Republic of China and Taiwan is not (and never has been) a part of it. Or China is a geographic region in which both the People's Republic of China and Taiwan exist.

Myth 2: China will reunify with Taiwan at any cost
When we hear the CCP chant this mantra, it is trying to tell us that it will fight a war to take over Taiwan. Use of the word "reunification" is of course a misnomer. Taiwan has never been part of the People's Republic of China, so by definition it is impossible for Taiwan to reunify with the People's Republic of China. But never mind that detail.

And we can also gloss over the assumption the CCP makes that if the PRC fought a war against Taiwan, the PRC would win. Certainly the PRC can lay waste to Taiwan with nuclear weapons and can probably do significant damage with conventional bombs. But modern military analysis shows that a successful invasion of Taiwan would require China to have complete air and sea superiority as well as 2,000 ships to move more than a million soldiers and their equipment and supplies to Taiwan quickly enough to mount a successful invasion. The impossibility of such a situation is obvious, so Taiwan really has little to fear as long as its military puts up a fight. Therefore the "at any cost" language is really just hyperbole.

But if China really wanted to unify with Taiwan at any cost, there is certainly a way to do it, and it is a peaceful technique. If the CCP were to offer to dissolve the PRC and appoint the leader of the Kuomingtang to the presidency of a new Republic of China that includes both Taiwan and the mainland, the Kuomingtang would be unable to resist the offer and the idea of a peaceable, democratic and non-communist China might be appealing to many Taiwanese. However, the disagreement between the CCP and the Kuomintang has always been more about who is in power than supposed national unity, so we will not expect any proposal for this type of unification coming from China.

Myth 3: The CCP is the only entity capable of governing China
Whenever there is a roundup of dissidents or pro-democracy activists in China, the CCP asserts that only the CCP is capable of governing China, and that if dissidents or pro-democracy advocates are allowed to have their way, it will lead China directly into chaos. First, it is not at all clear that the Chinese Communist Party is actually capable of governing China at all. With the blood of 30 million Chinese on its hands due to disastrous economic policies and political campaigns, followed by rampant civil-rights abuses and the Tiananmen Square massacre, it appears that the CCP's technique for governing China amounts to killing or imprisoning those who might speak a dissenting word. At the same time, China has 900 million farmers living a life of subsistence, and the number of people without employment approximately equals the entire population of the United States.

Of course there has been admirable economic progress in coastal cities in the past 20 years at the price of environmental destruction and heretofore unknown levels of corruption. But can the CCP claim credit for China's economic progress? A careful look shows that the greatest amount of progress is made where private entrepreneurs are allowed to do their work without substantial government interference. Where the government is involved, whether it be state-owned enterprises or joint ventures, the statistics show that economic failure is far more likely than not.

This does not show that the CCP is the only entity capable of governing China. Instead, it shows that the CCP is capable of governing China quite badly, and that where the CCP gets out of the way, Chinese do quite well for themselves. If the CCP were to refrain from quashing political dissent for just a few years, I have no doubt that Chinese would show themselves to be every bit as adept in the political arena as in science, engineering and manufacturing, and create a form of government far more efficient and effective than the CCP has ever been.

Daniel McCarthy is a lawyer in Salt Lake City, Utah. He has lived in Taiwan and traveled extensively in China and represents both US and Chinese businesses in international and domestic transactions. He can be reached at dmccart@xmission.com.

 

[Dr. Marten]

Ping!

[Fishing-guy]

It used to be Nationalists vs. Communists, so one China and two political systems make sense.

Now a day, the Communists still want to bring Taiwan under their control, but it is not clear what the political parties in Taiwan want to do? Other than the people who really want Taiwan independence, it is not clear what the rest want.

[batter]

Thanks for the ping. I read this yesterday. Very well done, IMO. Best of all, a fellow Utahn wrote the piece! ;)

Nevertheless, the CCP has never let logic and fact get in the way of their rule. China would be a very interesting (and economically powerfull) place if the Chinese were allowed to control their destiny.

[Dr. Marten]

"Now a day, the Communists still want to bring Taiwan under their control, but it is not clear what the political parties in Taiwan want to do?"

The Kuomingtang (formally known as the Nationalists) have never desired an independent Taiwan. In fact, it is just the opposite. The difference is that they envision a united Taiwan/China under a democratic government. Even the late Soon Mei-ling never made a cry for an "Independent Taiwan".

As for the DPP, it is quite clear that they desire an Independent Taiwan and rightly so. The same goes for the majority of the population in Taiwan.