Lando 
Posted on 03/13/2005 6:25:39 AM PST by Lando Lincoln
"If you want peace, prepare for war," goes the old Roman saying, and on the question of Taiwan, both China and the United States are following that advice. But strategic conditions in East Asia could make war more likely.
Tensions are rising primarily because Taiwan's political transformation is moving it away from mainland China. In the last two decades, the island nation has remade itself from an authoritarian state, dominated by the Nationalist Party, into a vibrant multiparty democracy. In 2000, executive power was peacefully transferred through free and fair elections to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Chen Shui-bian, the DPP president, won reelection last March - though not without controversy and a protracted recount - while in December the Nationalist Party held on to its parliamentary majority in competitive legislative elections. Freedom of the press is exercised and civil liberties are protected. By any measure of democratization, Taiwan is an admirable success.
Taiwan's triumph, however, is China's embarrassment. Although economic and social change has swept across China, its political system remains an anachronistic communist dictatorship that crushes dissent and controls the media.
The growing contrast between dictatorial China and democratic Taiwan is more than just a matter of political form. It is an element of national identity. Although important facets of Taiwanese culture - ancestry, language, cuisine - are Chinese, many people in Taiwan now see themselves as a distinct country, a free nation that has grown away from China. They are Taiwanese, not Chinese.
Since democratization began, the "return to the mainland" myth has further receded. The democratic political life shared by millions of Taiwanese is forging a common civic identity, and it cannot be dismissed as an invention of those who want to publicly declare independence.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the notion of the "status quo." For mainland China and the United States, it refers to the "one China" principle, a reflection of the politics of the 1970s - before democracy took root in Taiwan. For many Taiwanese, perhaps most, it has come to mean the situation that has actually prevailed since 1986, an empirical independence that allows them to rule themselves without Chinese control.
The Democratic Progressive Party has given political voice to this national aspiration and even the Nationalist Party, which for many years has accepted the idea that Taiwan is a part of China, has had to change its rhetoric to attract votes for the growing number of self-identified Taiwanese.
China, of course, rejects any hint of separation and doggedly holds on to the "one China" ideal. Even though the Communist Party has never administratively controlled the island, it claims sovereignty over Taiwan and has long threatened the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence. When the Nationalists ruled Taiwan, there was little possibility of such a declaration; but more recently the DPP leadership has flirted with actions and announcements that come perilously close to formal independence.
Realizing that Taiwan is slipping away, China has now upped the ante. On Tuesday, an anti-secession law was introduced in China's pliant legislature. The measure, which will certainly be enacted, authorizes "nonpeaceful means" to counter any move by Taiwan toward independence or secession. Previously, China would not renounce the use of force in contemplating a complete Taiwan breakaway; now it is positively committed to military action in a wider array of scenarios. The bill calls for a coercive response not just in the case of a formal declaration of Taiwan independence, but also in the event that "major incidents entailing Taiwan's secession from China should occur, or that possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted."
Conceivable interpretations of that include a declaration by Beijing that a large-scale public demonstration favorable to Taiwan independence, such as voting for DPP candidates, is justification for attack. The clause is open-ended enough that China might simply conclude that Taiwan is no longer committed to reunification and invoke the new legislation.
Beijing is also working hard to develop the military tools that would be necessary to invade or significantly damage Taiwan. Although the numbers are murky, Western analysts believe that China is building up its naval forces, its amphibious assault capability, and its ballistic missile threat.
The hardening of China's policy toward Taiwan has not gone unnoticed in Washington and Tokyo. On Feb. 18 the United States and Japan announced that security in the area around Taiwan is their "common strategic objective." Stripped of its diplomatic understatement, this new policy suggests that Japan, which had previously taken a more neutral position on the Taiwan question, would support a U.S. counterattack against a Chinese assault on the island. The long-standing U.S. commitment to militarily support Taiwan, as evidenced in the Taiwan Relations Act and in American actions over the years, is now bolstered by the addition of Japan.
It is, therefore, a dangerous time; one that calls for careful diplomacy and shrewd policy. China and Taiwan are growing apart. China is prescribing military action for a greater number of contingencies. The United States and Japan are committing themselves to defend Taiwan. Perhaps nobody wants war but, then again, who really wanted war in Europe in 1914?
Lando
Why don't we just equip Taiwan with nukes? Let the Chinese have their own N. Korean problem...
"democratic Taiwan" what a joke.
Chang was as dictatorial as any mainland despot. He just wasn't a commie.
Since North Korea borders on China....one would say that they ALREADY have the problem.
Besides, if the U.S. had wanted Taiwan to have nukes, Taiwan would already have nukes. I think the U.S. trusts Taiwan as much as it trusts Russia.
because China could turn around and give them to Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, etc ...
Will the US be willing to take on today's China (as opposed to the Korean War era China) to take a stand? We've been having a very uneasy relationship with China the last few decades and neither one will want to back down and lose face.
Let's hope this can be resolved peacefully.
But the real question is: What would Wal-Mart do?
Actually, he got most of his military training from the Soviets, just he was more interested in unifying China than he was in spreading the "joys" of communism.
I assume you are speaking of Mao Tse Tung? He was interested in unifying China too. I was referring to the equally despotic General Chang. I think he was interested in power too.
They were flip sides of the same coin.
Why don't we just equip Taiwan with nukes? Let the Chinese have their own N. Korean problem...
>>>
Who said Taiwan doesn't have a nuclear capability? lol
Nope. General Chaing Kai-shek (sp) received his military in the USSR.
That's exactly the sort of beligerant statement I expect to hear from a Democrat. Beligerance is not a sign of intelligence.
War in our lifetime is not beyond possibility. And if it is war, this one will be hard.
"But the real question is: What would Wal-Mart do?"
Yeah, the business community is so intertwined in China that I really wonder if we can (literally) afford to stand up to China. And I'm not just talking about the fortunes of rich people here. Business does tend to employ most people, and most businesses have some sort of economic dependence on China. And I can guarantee trouble with China will therefore hit everyone in the pocketbook to some extent. Then there is all of those bonds we sold them. (Whoops.)
If I were leader of Taiwan, I would definitely be worried that the US isn't going to do much if the Chinese come knocking.
Taiwan has not demonstrated a willingness to sacrifice for its independence and freedom unlike, say, Israel. Have they acted yet on the $18 billion arms package that U.S. defense experts say is the minimum they need to protect themselves from PLA assault?
That was over 50 years ago man. Do you deny that Taiwan is a democracy today?
From the CIA China country analysis website:
Population: 1,298,847,624 (July 2004 est.)
Military manpower availability: males age 15-49: 379,524,688 (2004 est.)
From 80 to 120 million surplus rural workers are adrift between the villages and the cities, many subsisting through part-time, low-paying jobs.
Growing shortages of electric power and raw materials will hold back the expansion of industrial output in 2004.
#2 world economy behind US with GDP +$7-tril, growing at +9%
"then again, who really wanted war in Europe in 1914?"
Beware of entangling alliances eh? Or is this a necessary one?
This latest ratcheting up by PRC may appear to be more saber rattling rhetoric in response to the new reality of US/Japan cooperation but it is also giving them the political framework to QUICKLY implement direct action against a hypothetical Taiwanese 'Declaration Of Independence', as they saber rattled about after last years elections, which may be an ominous development considering their simultaneous military preparations...they arent building dozens of amphibious assault vessels to invade MARS eh? ;-)
The Japan gambit was a very smart one for the U.S. but this kind of response had to be respected so now what? A formal end to U.S. support of the One China policy?? More 'subtle' [and 'sensitive'] preparations with the Japanese??? ;-)
'Interesting' [in the ancient Chinese curse sense of the term] moves on the chessboard...
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.