Posted on 07/31/2004 2:45:09 PM PDT by wagglebee
TAIPEI - Proposed Chinese legislation that would give a mandate for the reunification of Taiwan with the mainland would provide a legal basis for an attack on the island, Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian has said.
Mr Chen, speaking for the first time on the mainland's proposal to adopt a reunification law, said he was very concerned about it.
'China is undertaking a legal battle. If Taiwan does not follow, it will undertake a military battle,' he was quoted by the United Daily News as saying during a visit to the southern county of Tainan late on Thursday.
'The reunification law is a bid to obtain a basis to attack Taiwan,' he said.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao is considering a proposal made in May that parliament should draft and adopt a reunification law to prevent Taiwan from edging towards independence.
A reunification law would legally bind Chinese leaders to order the 2.5-million-strong People's Liberation Army to attack Taiwan if the island declared independence.
'I am very concerned,' Mr Chen said in Tainan.
Tension has been simmering between Taiwan and Beijing, rivals since a civil war that ended in 1949. Many security analysts see Taiwan as the most dangerous flashpoint in the Asia-Pacific region.
Both sides have been holding military exercises in the waters off Taiwan, leading some military analysts to conclude that the rising hostilities may have reached a critical juncture.
On Thursday, China for the first time denied that it had set a timetable to reunify Taiwan by force within the next 20 years.
'I have not seen any reports on this in the mainland's formal media, and internally I've also not heard of such a document,' Mr Wang Zaixi, vice-director of the Chinese Cabinet's Taiwan Affairs Office, told the media while attending a forum in Hangzhou, capital of southern Zhejiang province.
Mr Wang nevertheless stressed that Mr Chen risked war with the mainland if he pushed for a new Constitution by 2008.
The island's security lay not in building up an arsenal of missiles and submarines but in offering assurances that Taiwan was not planning to declare independence, Mr Wang said.
Beijing sees Mr Chen's goal of adopting a new Constitution by the end of his term in 2008 as a drive towards a formal declaration of independence and has been preparing for a possible military showdown.
'New tensions and even a serious crisis in the cross-strait situation may arise if Chen obstinately pursues his timetable,' Mr Wang said. -- AFP, Reuters, AP
by the way W...
thanks for pointing that out.
that SHOULD BE archived HERE if it is not already....
as this will become important later, should things heat up during our "wargames" surge practice....
Ping me when you post it.
I think I, along with several other freepers would like to comment.
HOW do you think our enemies the FRENCH can be expected to attempt to skew, influence or overthrow our elections this year. The time is about right for them to fart in our elevator, no?
robert
The issue is not Pan-Sino nationalism, but rather where does the US stand in recognizing the boundaries of sovereignty. Technically the Chinese Civil War never ended because the Communist Chinese have not defeated the KMT. Technically the KMT goverment never surrendered to the Communist and legally can claim it still rules China. Originally the US backed the KMT. If the US backs Taiwanese independence, the US helped overthrow the KMT by destroying their last stronghold in China and making the Communist Party the only government left standing in China. Technically the Civil War between the Communist and KMT ends, with KMT defeat and a new war begins over Taiwanese succession. Since none of the Chinese governments (Communist nor KMT) approves the Taiwanese move, it raises the same issues the US faced when the Confederate States declared independence from the US. The US policy towards unilateral succession is quite clear when it is applied to the US. Now we are changing our tune when it applies first to Yuglslavia and now China.
"My guess is India will take China's side in order to be on the side of who they guess will be the winner."
Well that's a real big IF -it is dependent on a number of logically interconnected issues.If the Paki generals lose their head(in the event of war in the Taiwan straits),which is very likely given the military's umbical cord relation with China & try to get nasty on JK or even launch a direct attack,India may have to take some sort of definite stand on the conflict in the straits.This standpoint will depend on how smartly Washington plays it's cards-if they try to prevent India from retaliating(as they did 2 years ) ago,India may end up being "neutral"-If Washington does allow India a freehand,a pro Taiwan attitude can definitely be expected,though i must stress, i don't see the possibility of India giving military help.FYI ,the real armsrace in the subcontinent(& Asia for that matter) is not between India & Pakistan ,but between India,Japan & S.Korea on one side & China on the other.Besides most people in India still remember the 1962 humiliation & have lots of sympathy for Tibet & being a democracy,the people's opinion counts(unless ofcourse this war takes place in a Tom Clancy book).
Many folks here seem to missing the importance of Russia in all this-they are China's most important arms supplier,though China has never really got access to the best Russian systems(that's usually given 1st to India) as they see themselves as potential long term rivals.In the rather highly unlikely event of a conflict turning real bloody & China's economic & military power being degraded significantly ,the Russians may possibly be forced to give more than diplomatic support.Also note that the Russian standpoint on this issue will also have a more significant bearing on India's views than America's as the Russian have always proved themselves as far more reliable allies.
If North Korea did'nt exist(let's assume the peninsula is united),the Japanese would be slugging it out with the South Koreans real nasty,despite Washington's influence.South Koreans still blame the Japanese invasion(1910) as the rootcause of partition & also can't forget the atrocities committed by Japanese forces.This combined with the present economic rivalry makes the possibility of these 2 cooperating against China very remote.Various opinion polls over the past 4-5 years have seen South Korea's affluent youth respond in manner which goes pretty much like"We'd rather by killed in a North Korean attack rather than team up with the Yankees & Japs to kill our Brethren"-hope that convinces you of the problem on that front.South Korea is among the biggest investors in China-LG,Hyundai & Samsung all make big profits there & China is now their biggest trading partner-do you think that the S.Koreans are foolish enough to fight a potentially disastrous war with a nuclear power over a punny island??seems unlikely.
W handled the EP-3C incident ably.
His appointment of Condoleezza Rice is significant: her writings in Foreign Affairs counsel "firmness" with China--
And she put Gen. Ji Shingde in his place, spanked him with "threats of incinerating L.A. are not helpful."
Bush has said, "We will do what it takes to defend Taiwan."
And he has provided the sale of defensive arms which Clinton kept bottled up for eight years of treason.
There is the seven carriers matter.
And the expedited Ballistic Missile Defense.
Bush knows China still aids the Taliban--as he knows how to read a map and the signs of China's hidden hand in sock puppets.
China has maneuvered the ten ASEAN nations into warning Taiwan they will side with China.
China may wish to accelerate its desired assimilation to be over in time to benefit from the Olympics in Beijing.
It has the Hong Kong complication: the victim refuses to die, so will be subject to intimidation.
The Bush team watches all of this--and has positioned itself to advantage.
China is nationalistic, but not along the Japanese nor Baathist lines. It is more along modern India's model. Both countries had a glorious past followed by centuries of chaos. Now that both countries figured out how to survive in a modern world and making great materialistic gains, their national pride and nationalism is coming back to the surface. They believe that they are now in position to reclaim their place in the world. I do not think China will go nuts when oil is too expensive. Unlike the US adversion to nuclear power, they will follow the French model of building nuclear power plants and using their abundant supply of coal.
B
"On interpretation of North Korea's vehement anti-American militarism is that is a cover for protecting itself from the real enemy, China."
Pretty decent interpretation,the slight problem being it is logical only in the context of a Tom Clancy or Dale Brown novel.The North Korean regime is like a parasite,which is kept alive ,because China feeds it.If the Chinese were not steadfast in their support to Kim Jong 2,he would have been out long ago(either by a coup or American backed dissent)-Do you honestly believe that North Korea can build & export all those missiles on its own-u need big connections to do that & what better connection than the world's fastest growing economy.Besides even if NK saw China as a threat,why the hell should it develop missiles with a range of over 5,000kms-they afterall do share a common landborder & being much smaller in size,such missiles are more of a liability than an asset.If you want a real interpretation North Korea's militarism,which is given by Indian & Japanese analyists,it is to weaken & tie down Japan (& to a lesser extent ,South Korea & the US) in the region-something which China can ensure by proxy ie without any significant cost.Oh btw,they have used the same method elsewhere ,by suppplying nuke tech & missiles to the Pakis to keep India tied down in the subcontinent.In short ,North Korea & Pakistan,help ensure that China's most potent rivals cannot have as big as pan-asian role as it has.
Simple fact is the US does not and never has recognized Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. But you know that.
John Kerry might decide to. But that is another issue. And you know that too.
If reality is more important than principle, here is a reality one must deal with. Prior to 9/11 Taiwan can push for independence and assume that the US cannot afford PRC usage of military force without ramifications to our Asian allies. Today we are in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting our War on Terrorism (WOT) with the prospect of expanding the war against Iran and/or Syria. These coming fights are merely battles in the WOT. We still do not know what the outcome will be. Will terrorism be defeated or will lead to a larger war (Clash of Civilization) with the rest of the Arab Islamic world. I think Taiwan will row the dice, causing a clash between the US and PRC. China will lose the war, but she will not forget and will become the second assymetric front in our current WOT. We are a great power, but can we fight a two front war?? The EU, Russia and India will sit like monkeys and watch two lions fight. Taiwan gains, but what do we get in return?
Being an Indian , I do admit that there are a few similarities between the nationalistic passions of the 2.But there are distinct differences too-
1.Though China was never colonised in the sense that India was ( & besides a pan-Indian identity emerged only in the late 19th century,after the Brits united the country politically & materially)-it was treated as a vassal state of the colonialists & subjected to every possible humiliation.The Indian experience of colonialism varied depending on what part of India you were talking about (some were directly governed by the Brits ,while others were run by Kings who owed allegiance to London).Moreover the brutal Japanese invasion which started in 1935 & went till the end of WW2-has a big impact on many Chinese minds.The inhuman brutality of Japanese forces & the helplessness of the Chinese then has now given way to a resolve which is supportive of China taking a more militant role in the region.So now you see the Chinese engage in hard diplomacy, be it on North Korea ,Taiwan or trade,something which India does more passively.
2.Since the revolution of '49,most Chinese leaders saw India as a longterm threat-it was a country of similar potential & worse a democracy.Though things have been quiet since the 62 war-the rivalry between the 2 can be seen in active Chinese support to the Pakis & an unannounced arms & space race.One of the main reasons why India began developing nuclear weapons was because the Chinese tested them.
3.China has been open in its desire to be a global power as early as the 1950s-India on the other hand was interested in being a champion of the 3rd world.You can see China give aid to Albania,Crotia,Ghana etc-India does it closer to home esp South East Asia.
What the heck do you mean?
The french are still relevante.
for some important cooking and some haute coutre fashion.
They have clearly won their place in the world.
OHhhh I see, you meant relevante to what is REALLY happening in the world, sociopolitcally important... ahhh nevermind.
they are also good at farting in elevators.
Sorry. I was wrong, having overlooked the elevator farting thing.
As to the India/Pakistan/China dynamic, it is a real tossup. My wild guess is that India will see China as the winner and openly support China (France wasn't the only country to hold joint exercises with China; India held one back in November of 2003.) But one assassination in Islamabad could change everything overnight.
"wasn't the only country to hold joint exercises with China; India held one back in November of 2003."
Well sorry to say this,your views on Indo-China relations are based on a few assumptions.Being an Indian ,living in India ,i'm at a slightly (not boasting here) better position to understand the dynamics of India-China relations.The exercise you referred to did happen-but it was essentially a courtesy port visit which also included search & rescue drills-no weapons were fired(do you think 2 future rivals want to show each other their wares.Besides does'nt the US Navy conduct exercises with the Saudis, Egyptians & a lot of Arabs,many of whom don't even recognize Israel.If your logic is applied here ,wouldn't the US back them in a conflict against Israel(did i forget to add that India has held "hot" naval exercise with the Japanese , Vietnamese & South Korean navies,all of whom are not bosom buddies of the PRC)-India is a developing country which wants a big role for itself,if the US can engage terrorists like the Pakis & the Saudis,can u blame India(or even the French) for conducting exercises.The blunt fact of the matter is India does'nt trust the China,though they don't necessarily oppose them as well-the same excuse that folks on here use-NATIONAL INTERESTS!!!!
I don't know whether you did so intentionally ,but u seem to have left out the American angle in all this.Afterall in 1971, when Indira Gandhi was about to split Pakistan,Nixon did converse with Mao,who agreed to mobilize their military divisions to deter India(the Soviet mobilisation made the Chicoms backoff).If the US is prepared to give India the status it deserves,I see no reason why it shouldnt oppose China.
You are in a far better situation to see what is going on that I am, and I certainly appreciate hearing about it on the ground.
I forgot to add that Nixon sent in the USS Enterprise battlegroup to the Bay of Bengal to position itself against the Indian navy's aircraft carrier group which was bombing modern Bangladesh,then East Pakistan(my dad was in the IN at that time & was part of Eastern Naval task force)-fortunately or unfortunately,the Soviets sent subs to shadow the US fleet & in the end nothing happened.
Well what use in scratching dead bodies-the Indian & US armed forces have been holding regular exercises with each other for 3 years ,the foundations of which were laid when (the idol of all Freepers!!!!!!) Clinton visited here in 2000.If i'm correct,An Indian airforce contingent of Jaguar strike jets is now on multilateral exercises in Alaska.Infact just over a month back,I saw a US Arleigh Burke class (BLK 1) ship docked on a very short port of call here(Cochin,South India).Infact one of the main reasons why the US exercises with India is the fact that India uses pretty much the same weaponry that China does(SU-30MK fighter-bombers,MI-17 choppers,naval & land based SAMs etc)-& if im not wrong,the Russians don't seem to mind at all.
Despite all its natural qualifications,India can never be a big US ally like the UKfor a lot of reasons
1.a very divided polity.
2.lots of expats in the Persian Gulf(6 million of them-the primary reason why troops were not sent to Iraq).
3.A Muslim population of over 130 million(world's 2n largest)-though most prefer minding their own business & peace loving(!!),u never know how they could react if India was seen as anti-Muslim,something the US is)
4.& lastly,India has a independent attitude & wants a role for itself on various issues(something which the UK has pretty much forfeited to NATO,the EU).
"Various opinion polls over the past 4-5 years have seen South Korea's affluent youth respond in manner which goes pretty much like"We'd rather by killed in a North Korean attack rather than team up with the Yankees & Japs to kill our Brethren"-hope that convinces you of the problem on that front.South Korea is among the biggest investors in China-LG,Hyundai & Samsung all make big profits there & China is now their biggest trading partner-do you think that the S.Koreans are foolish enough to fight a potentially disastrous war with a nuclear power over a punny island??seems unlikely."
Taiwan is hardly a "puny" island. It is strategically important for the U.S. to maintain its independence. However, I was not aware that the anti-Japenese feeling is so strong in South Korea. I would seem unlikely that such an alliance would form. Unfortunately, I think the "affluent young" of South Korea would be singing another tune if the North ever invades. The two cultures have to be radically different after all these years? Admittedly, I am occidential and have a have time understanding an oriental mindset.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.