From: li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tong-Kang Li)
Subject: Re: Military Reunification
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 16:58:46 GMT


In article <1daeliINNf42@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>, tseng-neill@yale.edu (Neill Tseng) writes...
>
>	First of all, estimates and informal polls show that 95% of the
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	electorate supports Independence in itself.  The reason this is not
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>	reflected in the polls is because of the KMT's vote-buying and command
>	of the airwaves.  As I said earlier, these polls are not accurate 
>	because freedom of speech is not always guaranteed, and people must
>	always fear for their safety given the KMT's harsh tactics.

I think the above Mr. Tseng's statement is based on October 10, 1992 issue 
of The Economist magazine on 18-page Taiwan story (an interesting article) 
but with a little twist. Following is the original article:

"The ebullient Mr. Hsu was elected chairman (of DPP) and the (party) congress
adopted a resolution urging the government to hold a plebiscite on whether or 
not to establish the "Republic of Taiwan".

Given last December's election results (72% -KMT vs. 24% -DPP), the government 
could argue the plebiscite has already been decided. Is Mr. Hsu suitably 
abashed? Not one bit: a quarter of electorate is with us, he says, and it 
would be 95%, were it not for the threats from the mainland and the KMT's 
vote-buying and command of the television channels. He could be right, and the 
test will come this December in the general election for the Legislative Yuan, 
the first in Taiwan's history that will be without the "old thieves". Ms. Ying,
the publisher of Commonwealth, calls it a "watershed". Mr. Hsu agrees, and 
confidently adds: "My guess is we'll win more than 30% of the vote... People 
here want a strong opposition." Quite so, but to make the chairman's 
prediction come true the DPP had better find some issues other than just 
independence."

I wonder where Mr. Tseng's so-called "estimates and informal polls" came
from? From Mr. Hsu, one person poll? Mr. Hsu has publicly admitted the 
TI idea has cost them in the last December's election. So this year DPP 
repackaged TI as "One China, One Taiwan" and wish it can win more support 
in the coming election.

According to the recent poll in Taiwan (from ~2000 random samples), ~15%
support Taiwan independence (see the October's World Journal). ~17% said
they will support if it is labelled as "One China, One Taiwan". 2% increase
only. And dont say people are afraid of speaking out. Taiwan People can 
support TI openly now in Taiwan.

>	No, part of this is addressed above.  Additionally, it does not get
>	Taiwan any benefits of independence!  I will address these benefits
>	below.  Furthermore, I have already stated before why it is not
>	necessarily in the Mainland's interests to militarily attack, and why
>	international pressure could be mounted to preclude this.  This will
>	all be answered more specifically in the paragraphs below.

Why "two Chinas" can not give the benefits of independence? President Lee
once said "Taiwan has been an independent country under name of Republic
of China". Or you just want Taiwan to be independent from KMT, then that's
different story.

Some netters said "One-China policy" is myth? Maybe, if KMT claims to "retake
the mainland" certainly it is unrealistic. To me, it is a protection umbrella 
to secure an "independent Taiwan (from PRC)" CCP can say little about this. 

Some TIers criticize KMT claims her sovereignty over the Mainland. In fact,
National Unification Council has concluded in August 1992 that at present
ROC has sovergeinty over Taiwan and a few islands only and PRC has sovergeinty 
over the Mainland only".

>	That is not necessarily true.  There are many gains to be made for
>	Taiwan itself through independence.  Then, it could be formally
>	recognized by many foreign nations and negotiate more treaties and
>	business agreements, as well as join in international instruments
>	such as GATT.  

You are kidding! At present, under pressure of CCP's China, most of foreign
countries can not recognize Taiwan as "Republic of anything" that includes
"Republic of China" not even mention "Republic of Taiwan". Taiwan proposed
the name TPKM (Taiwan, PonHu, Kinmen, Matsu) to enter GATT but CCP's China 
put pressure on GATT, GATT has asked Taiwan use TPKM with alias "Chinese 
Taipei" Taiwan has no choice but accepted. The reason CCP's China against 
TPKM name she does not want TPKM has any implication of Taiwan independence.
Some People criticized KMT's "One-China" policy has caused Taiwan's diplomatic
isolation. It is not "One-China" or "Two-China" caused the isolation but CCP's
China. Without CCP's roadblock, I believe ROC has already had her embassies 
around the world and re-entered the UN.

>       Since the "three noes" still exist regarding relations
>	with China, these could be formally abolished with a declaration of
>	independence, opening up even more avenues for trade with the mainland.

CCP's China has said many times she will use forces if Taiwan declares 
independence. Does it open up war or more trade or further diplomatic 
isolation? And this is the one has bothered Taiwan people most. 

>	Five thousand years of Chinese history.  The problem is, many of the
>	people are native Taiwanese.  Although much of Taiwan's culture comes
>	from China, it is unique because it also contains influences from
>	Dutch and Japanese culture, as well as Aboriginal culture,
>	that Chinese culture does not contain.  Since the KMT's arrival on 
>	Taiwan in 1945, it has suppressed much of Taiwan's cultural richness, 
>	utilizing the attitude "We are all Chinese."  Taiwanese folk music,
>	Taiwanese opera, Taiwanese folk dancing, are all uniquely Taiwanese
>	and not from the Mainland.  These could all flourish
>	if Taiwan were to gain its Independence, free from the KMT's 
>	ideology that "We are all Chinese."   

According to the recent poll in Taiwan (see the World Journal), 57% think
them Chinese, 28% think them Taiwanese, the rest think them Taiwanese/Chinese. 
And those 28% think them Taiwanese, 53% of them feel that Taiwan eventually 
should unify with China. With this survey I dont think I need to argue further.

I also have trouble understanding why some TIers are trying so hard to prove
the necessity of denial of their Chinese (or Han) identity in order to 
promote TI. Is that really necessary? In my opinion, if TI becomes a clear 
choice, I dont see the contradiction between a new nation built by Chinese 
on Taiwan and their Chinese (or Taiwanese/Chinese) identity? If it is really 
wrong, I guess those TIers who call them Taiwanese American should consider 
to throw away one of identities first? I just dont understand why those TIers 
so rigid or are there other political purposes?

I think most of Taiwan residents have considered Taiwan as their homeland 
and will defend the island if invasion occurs. No matter how different 
the opinion is, Taiwan security and people interest should put in the first 
place. After all we all share the same fate. We should stop "they WSR or 
they BSR" that will "they" us to death. Tolerate different opinion (but 
not distortion) and stop labelling people or promoting hatred among the 
groups. Express your opinion based on the facts.

>	No, there is no fundamental reason why.  I have proven this above.
>	Moreover, if the two were to be reunified, Taiwan's funds would have
>	to be shared with the rest of the mainland.  They would be channeled
>	in the budget to the poor provinces of China, and Taiwan would end
>	up deprived.  Also, I listed many economic benefits to be gained with
>	the rest of the world above.

Taiwan government has said the reunfication will come only when "China" 
becomes a democratic, free, wealth-balanced nation. And this "China" is not 
born yet. So before then your concern about Taiwan's resources will be shared 
with the rest of the Mainland will not happen. Also, if this "ideal China" 
really becomes true, then what's problem with unification? Unification with
China does not mean Taiwan has to be just a province of China. Even Deng
Xiao-Ping has said recently that the name of nation, form of the government, 
contents of the Constitution can be changed and urged CCP be more flexible 
about Taiwan/China issue. We will foresee the changes of CCP's Taiwan policy. 
CCP's China will realize they have to compromise just as Taiwan has to. Also, 
Mr. Tim Chuang said unfication will bring Taiwanese under brutal rule of CCP. 
Yes, it is very likely if we do NOW. But if "ideal China" really becomes real, 
there is no "who rule who" but just elect a group of people to manage the 
national affairs. Before it happens, keep Taiwan independent from CCP's China 
which is so called "maintain status quo". Under "maintain status quo" Taiwan 
can avoid the military confrontation with China and maintain her independence
status but should continue her political reform, economic prosperity, and
ease the tension between Taiwan and the Mainland.

>	First, you must prove that the Mainland would accept the severe
>	economic dislocations and attack anyway.  Not only would China lose
>	its valuable trade with Taiwan, but the rest of its economy would be
>	hurt by an attack as well.   Would the Chinese government be willing
>	to accept the resultant increase in government spending, especially
>	with the inflation and deficit you note above?  Would they be willing
>	to do so at the risk of jeopardizing their 9% GNP growth?  Would they
>	be willing to accept the shame, sanctions, and loss of face in the
>	international community that would accompany such an attack, especially
>	in the tide of democratic change and self-determination that has
>	engulfed the world in the 1990s?

This week Vice-premier(?) Lee Ray-Hwan of CCP's China said if Taiwan declares 
independence, CCP will attack Taiwan at any cost, even stop her economic 
development. Until TIers can convince Taiwan people the military threat from
CCP is fantasy (quote from some DPPers' statement) I believe TI is tough to 
sell. Even Mr. Hsu, chairman of DPP is aware of this. 

Last December's election was treated as an indicator of Taiwan independence.
The US government openly welcomed the election results. Even Washington Post 
and New York Times etc liberal newspapers also said that Taiwan people has 
rejected the idea of TI (see last December's edition).

Given the staus quo, ie, an independent Taiwan from PRC, I doubt many people 
want to risk the war just for the sake of changing the name and declaring 
formal independence. In the last December's election, many many Taiwan voters 
have chosen "maintain the status quo" as the best choice for now not immediate 
TI or immediate reunification.