Lu takes `one country, two systems' to task (China)

Vice President Annette Lu (§f¨q½¬) yesterday pointed with alarm at the "one country, two systems" model proposed by Beijing for Taiwan, in light of the situation it has created in Hong Kong after only five years of Chinese rule.

Lu, at a meeting with over 150 researchers at Academia Sinica, said that Hong Kong residents, having watched their economy regress, their real estate drop in value and their unemployment rate skyrocket, have not been pleased since British colonial rule ended in 1997.

In addition to the deterioration of the quality of life, Lu noted that the population's identification with the Chinese government had dropped since China's takeover.

"A survey done last year showed that only 2.2 percent of Hong Kong's people consider themselves Chinese, down from the previous 30 percent. This result best reflects the public feeling of [Hong Kong's population]" Lu said, adding that the figure also served as a warning to the 23 million people of Taiwan.

Ever since the handover, Beijing has sought to persuade Taipei to accept the "one country, two systems" formula, arguing that Hong Kong's prosperity was the best demonstration of the formula's success.

"Yes, Hong Kong's people continue to dance and bet on the horses. But in reality, they are not happy," she said, mocking Beijing's claim before the handover that lifestyles in the territory would remain the same under its administration.

Despite Beijing's promise that Hong Kong would remain an open society with a vibrant market economy, the territory is facing a crisis of confidence after being hit by two recessions in four years.

Having sought to replace "one China" with "one Chinese," Lu said the greater China region could be categorized into "political Chinese," "economic Chinese" and "cultural Chinese."

While the PRC and the ROC represent different political entities, "economic Chinese" refers to the market formed by Chinese living in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and Malaysia, while "cultural Chinese" includes all Chinese societies worldwide, according to Lu.

"Nonetheless, success in economic integration should not be linked with political integration," she said.

Having sought to replace "one China" with "one Chinese," Lu said the greater China region could be categorized into "political Chinese," "economic Chinese" and "cultural Chinese."

Wow. THAT is an excellent comment. That pretty much sums up my long held position.

The CCP thinks their political system "is China", and the "one and ONLY China..."

Unfortunately it does not work like that.

While some in the DDP I feel are out in left field, I think this definition should define their party and does in reality define the situation of "China". It does not step on the toes of the KMT, nor history. And it is factually correct, and not based on facism of any stripe.

Vice President Annette Lu yesterday pointed with alarm at the "one country, two systems" model proposed by Beijing for Taiwan, in light of the situation it has created in Hong Kong after only five years of Chinese rule.

Taiwan has repeated rejeced the "one country, two systems" model and it is not really on the table for consideration. Both the KMT and DDP can agree that the major differences between Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan is that Hong Kong and Macau were colonies of European powers. The European powers negotiated their return. Taiwan is not a colony and believes they are a country in their own right.

The policy difference between the KMT and DDP is that the KMT wants to reunite with Taipei at the helm. The DDP wants to officially break away from the rest of China and form two Chinese countries which is the political reality today.

Many Taiwanese believe Lee Tung-hui, the previous President under the KMT, really supported the DDP's position of moving toward two Chinas. By the end of this tenure, the KMT was is disarray. The prospects for reunification under "one country, two systems" or any other structure is almost completely dead now.

Although Hong Kong has gone through economic distress since the handover, the residents do not blame Beijing. First was the Asian Financial Crisis and then the US recession. Neither can fairly be blamed on Jiang Zemin. Any and all anger seems to be directed toward Hong Kong Chief Tung Chee Hwa.

Having sought to replace "one China" with "one Chinese," Lu said the greater China region could be categorized into "political Chinese," "economic Chinese" and "cultural Chinese."

Although I know what she is saying here, I think it would be a mistake. China would view it as a victory for getting Taiwan one step closer to their control.

If Taiwan appears confused about their own identity, so will other countries.

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.