The Cross Strait Times

Being that Taiwan’s political status is so volatile on the island and off and how the polarization of national identities has obscured real socioeconomic issues, can’t we just have easy referenda to solidify that we agree to disagree? Here are two such low-hanging fruit that can be easily picked.

Issue: The Republic of China is the current legal government of Taiwan.
[Yes] [No]

Why is this even being asked? Because even though the Cairo Declaration stated that the Allies intended to hand Taiwan to the Republic of China at the end of World War II, the Chinese Civil War prevented the ROC from being present at the Treaty of San Francisco where Japan renounced all rights to Taiwan. As a result, some Taiwanese activists say this lapse in the ROC’s acceptance nullifies the ROC government’s jurisdiction over Taiwan.

As it is, not many people dispute that the ROC is the government of Taiwan, as the ROC has been co-opted by the mostly native-Taiwanese Democratic Progressives and Taiwan Solidarity Union. These parties have elected officials and sent them to participate in the ROC government; the DPP has even had a member become ROC president! These facts alone should testify to the ROC’s legitimacy to Taiwan, but to make it official, why not have the referendum? We know how the results will turn out, and it will solidify the ROC’s legitimacy.

Issue: Taiwan shall maintain the status quo for the next 20 years, status quo being defined as not changing the legal name of the country to move towards either unification or independence. At the end of 20 years, the issue will be reopened for debate.
[Yes] [No]

This is a slightly different take of Sun Bin’s Pinning Taiwan. While Sun Bin’s referendum plan is a vote on unification vs. independence that is deliberately set up to lapse into status quo, this setup is pretty straightforward. Agree to keep the status quo or keep debating in polarizing nationalistic circles as we do now. Considering the high support for maintaining the status quo, this again, should be another easy pass. According to the linked poll, “keep status quo indefinitely” and “keep status quo, decide later” together are already at 63.5%. Throw in “status quo now, unification later,” the figure goes up to 74.0%, and “status quo, independence later” bumps up the figure again to 91.1%

Granted, if such a vote were to take place, the vote totals for “yes” may not be a whopping 91%, but it could easily pass 50% or even 75%.

Solidifying the status quo would also be another means of getting Beijing to remove the missiles currently pointed at Taiwan. If Taiwan has no intention to declare independence for 20 years, then the missiles have no need to be there. Don’t be fooled by the warmongers who say that Beijing will launch a preemptive strike for unification. Beijing is not stupid; without Taiwan declaring independence, the Communists will not sacrifice their revenue-generating coastal cities whose wealth keeps the Communists in power. Stop the flow of money into China (because all the ports are destroyed and foreign companies see both sides of the strait as too unstable to outsource to) and the Communists lose their legitimacy. A Pyrrhic victory for the CCP would be no victory at all.

The added bonus of the 20-year status quo freeze period co-existing with cross-strait disarmament is that it provides a stable framework (at least, more stable than currently) for both sides of the strait to repair official relations, facilitate greater cultural exchanges, and bring about better mutual understanding.

The Pan-Blue camp needs to stop being afraid of referenda and use them for their political ends, as the Pan-Green camp has done. Beijing and Washington would have no reason to be concerned because 1) Beijing has learned that interfering only backfires and 2) they’d know what the results would be anyway — a solidification of the status quo. We already know what the referenda results will be, so isn’t that all the more reason to do it?

As I write this, the PRC is sending its navy to the coast of Somalia, to do its part in contributing to the stability of the global community. I think it’s refreshing that Beijing, usually isolationist, is stepping up to take on more of the world’s responsibilities. Surely, part of the PRC’s motivation must come from self-interest. The Red Sea is a valuable trade link connecting East Asia with Europe, and rerouting ships around Africa means using more fuel and reaping fewer profits. But it is from knowing one’s self-interest can one be aware of the interests of others. As the PRC wants to be a regional power, by contributing to the anti-piracy fight it is starting to use its power responsibly. A small step, but at least it’s been taken.

Charter 08 by now is probably old news to anyone reading this blog. I admire their outspokenness and agree that democracy must come to China. Interestingly, only one arrest so far has happened as a result of 300 intellectuals signing this document. Perhaps Beijing has learned that withholding the iron fist prevents PR disasters, but it’s also led to a lot more people being unafraid to come out in support of the controversial document.

The other side: a leftist argument calling for the maintenance of a Communist “tutelage” (quotes mine) until Chinese civil society is ready for democracy. The link brings up real problems with civil society in Taiwan, but I don’t think it really should stop democracy from being implemented. The idea that young democracy and an inexperienced electorate could be hijacked by fascists, however, is a legitimate concern.

Is democracy in the Mainland inevitable? I will say some form of “freer government” definitely is. That is, if the current regime intends to continue trade further its ambitions of making the PRC a global player. Naysayers who think that China will remain authoritarian “forever” while becoming a major economic and trading world power tend to forget their history and geography.

• Island and peninsular countries with long coastlines and busy, open ports are susceptible to new ideas with people freely going in and out, relying on businesses and a multitude of institutions that keep government in check. As a result, these countries become progressive and free thinking due to economic competition and the free flow of ideas (e.g., Western Europe).
• Landlocked countries (or countries with frozen coastlines) are less likely to have people move freely and exchange ideas because transportation limitations don’t allow it. Government becomes the main authority of reliance because trade and wealth generation is harder without trade ports. As a result, the country trends towards authoritarianism (e.g., Russia).

What does this say about China? China has a long eastern coastline and the rest is bound by land, mostly mountains and desert. This results in what tdaxp calls a “red-blue divide” that people in the US are probably familiar with [1]. New ideas are constantly coming into China through trade, making democracy, or something like it, pretty much inevitable. The only way the Communist Party can prevent the spread of democratic ideals is by shutting off China from the rest of the world in an imitation of North Korea. Doing so will destroy China’s and the world’s economy, plummeting the Chinese people into poverty and obviating the Communists’ source of governmental legitimacy. Of course, such a scenario will never happen. The Communists may want to hold onto their power, but they are not stupid. China must engage the world through trade and politics to become the great power that its leaders want China to be. Geography is destiny, and the Communist Party will have to manage a democratic transition.

How to manage the transition?

I propose that the CCP actually groom an opposition party into existence to ensure a stable back-and-forth handover between parties. There are two ways to go about this. One is to turn the factions within the CCP into de facto parties with separate names that people can vote for. The other is to build up the KMT as an alternative party by making the Revolutionary Committee of the KMT the mainland branch of Taiwan’s KMT. As evidenced by the forums between the CCP and KMT, the two parties are capitalistic and bureaucratic enough (and arguably, corrupt enough) to understand each other. The two can then set up a framework that passes the power between the two sides, easing China into a two-party system while preventing state collapse as seen in the former USSR and Qing Dynasty. Hopefully the eventual competition between the parties will grind the corruption out of both sides, but hey, a political party without corruption ain’t a party, right?

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/08/14/russia-is-bad.html

The legitimacy of the Communist Party’s rule over mainland has always been its ability to deliver economic growth. As this global economic crisis is engulfing mainland china as well, how will the Communist Party respond? In many ways, aircow believes that the ceremonial talks between Taipei and Beijing was more benefitial for the Communist Party. Direct links, and mainland china has shown to have not much of a real economic impact. With the current turmoil, and strikes going on in mainland china, KMT must position itself as the democratic party for all of China.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/2827365/

At long last, no more circuitous trips to Hong Kong or Okinawa just to get to the mainland!  Need to make a day trip to Shanghai from Taipei (or vice versa) and be home the same night?  No problem!  Well, it won’t be a problem once the flights become more regular.  The opening of the three direct links — something both the Blues and Greens have been clamoring for years — is certainly a cause for celebration.

The good news is that at least the infrastructure is in place for better seaport and airport facilities all over Taiwan.  With Taipei - Shanghai day trips soon to be a reality, Taoyuan Airport City may finally, pardon the pun, take off.  Under normal economic conditions, this would be great.  Hundreds of thousands of new jobs could be created with these new cargo, flight, and shipping hubs now opening to the land across the strait.  But in the global economic slowdown, how much will opening Taiwan’s market to Mainland China actually help Taiwan?

Business, finance, and shipping do stand to profit from these liberalized links.  As for tourism, the fact that Beijing authorities screen who can and cannot go to Taiwan, and that Taipei makes it harder for Continentals to enter Taiwan than the US, really doesn’t help.  Espionage paranoia, anyone?

It was about time.  The Prosecutors of the Special Counsel finally issued an indictment for former President Chen Shui-bian (and 13 others), giving the government some kind of sound reasoning for imprisoning the ex-president — nevermind that we don’t actually have habeas corpus here.  Why the delay?  President Chen has already public admitted to wrongdoing, so it’s not like there was a lack of evidence to get the indictment before now!  Curiously, as soon as the indictment was issued, President Chen was released without bail.  So, let me get this right:

We arrest a man and imprison him without an indictment,

Weeks later the court issues an indictment,

We release the accused without bail.

Isn’t this backwards from how most democratic governments do things?