From: cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung)
Subject: F16s, mainland chauvinistic pigs, etc.
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Summary: USA is the biggest winner in this debate
Organization: Objectivity Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 00:25:01 GMT

The level of bickering had reached a new level with the
recent (potential) sales of F-16.  Here is my two cents of worth.

I hope the following is self-evident:

1. Supporter of the sales of F-16 is not necessarily a
   supporter of TI.

2. Supporter of 'people of Taiwan decided for themselves'
   is not necessarily a TI proponent either. [People of
   Taiwan could decide to unite with mainland.  As unlikely
   as it may sound today, who know what is the sentiment
   in 50 years?]

3. On the other hand, distractor of arms sales is not
   necessarily a supporter of 'forced-reunification'.

4. A supporter of 'reunification' does not necessarily
   endorse the use of force, nor necessarily think it
   is the right moment for reunification (by peace or
   otherwise).

5. A supporter of 'reunification' does not necessarily 
   endorse what the CCP has done in mainland, much less
   a 'communist running dog'. 

With the exception of one or two poster who proclaims (s)he is a
TIer, I don't think the majority of pro-F16s-sales claimed to
be TIer.  Many of them do favor the idea of 'people of Taiwan 
decided for themselves'. 

I have not seen any anti-F16s-sales posters proclaiming that
Mainland must use force to invade Taiwan, now or then.  
I don't think many of these posters are proud of
what CCP had done in mainland in 6/4 TAM (and/or other time
and places in China) and I have yet to find a single article 
suggesting to apply the same brutality to Taiwan.

So why are the cries of 'mainland chauvinistic pigs', 'blood-
thirsty murderer', etc...

I think the heated exchange, sometimes with vulgars and demeaning
labels/hats, underscores some fundamental assumption of people
from Mainland and Taiwan [again the usual disclaimer that not all
think the same way, but is a useful approximation].

People from mainland think that Taiwan is an integral part of
the territory of China.  It is only that Taiwan is not under
the effective control of PRC.  Taiwan does have its own legislative
and executive government, has its own currency, etc.  However, it
is not a different country, just that the country is not 'united'
under one government.  

With this assumption, they see the people-determine-themselves as
a ploy of the imperialist to divide-and-conquer China, just a
continuation of what the imperialist has done to China for the
past hundred and fifty years.  They have seen what it means to 
the security of China when the Russian jets and missiles are stationed
in Mongolia (A few minutes from Beijing).  They are determined not
to have this kind of things happen again (although the Mongolian 
independence was the doing of KMT, not CCP).  They see the desire
of people in Taiwan (and Tibet for that matter) getting democracy, 
freedom, economic prosperity as no different from that of people
from mainland.  They all strive for the similar ideals, and they
believe they could work it out in the long run.  They don't want
to impose the communist system to Taiwan at this moment.  However, they
see independence is road of no-return (Germany is an exception rather
than the rule), while over time, CCP will (or be forced to) loosen its 
tight grip and Mainland will be on its way to democracy, etc..


People of Taiwan, on the other hand, does not accept the assumption 
that Taiwan is an integral part of China.  They maintain that
with the many years of de-facto independence, they have every
right to determine their future themselves, and not being told
by the mainlander of what to do.

With this assumption, they see it is their choice to unify or not.
They see it as arrogance and insensitive chauvinism to subject the 
views of the people of Taiwan to that of the mainlanders.  So it is
entirely appropriate to defend themselves against any reckless attempt
(however the small chance) for the mainlanders to invade Taiwan.


Well, do it lead to anywhere?  I think people from both side of the
strait may want to appreciate the position of the other side and
be more sensitive.  There are times people tend to over-react.  Too
much emotion and name calling tends to get in the way of exchange
of ideas and l understanding.  I think forums like this should
serve a useful purpose that people from both side could learn
from each other, be open-minded and tolerant of different opinions.
Take this as a valuable opportunity to learn from people with
different background.  We here in USA or other foreign countries have
a unique opportunity to have open exchange without any fear
of political repercussion, so please make the best use of it.


A final word, I think we probably could all agree that: let's keep
the status quo, no unification or independence for now, and hope both 
governments have a peaceful competition and really do something good
for the Chinese people of both sides for generations to come. 


P.S.
While I am at this:
1. Why no promise from Mainland not to use force?

   I suspect Deng would probably do it if Taiwan/KMT promise not
   to be independent.  [To the aging leader of CCP, they still have
   fresh memories of aggression from foreign powers, and still
   frame this issue as in internal affair.]

   It is ironic that people think the declaration of not to use
   force is so important, when the word of guarantee of the CCP government 
   are often of suspect.  If USA could reverse an executive
   order of not to sell arms to Taiwan, what would prevent CCP
   from changing its mind about force?  CCP promised '50 years of
   status quo' for Hong Kong, and there are very few people in HK
   would take the promise at its face value seriously.

   To me, such guarantee carries as much as weight as a 'no-layoff
   policy' by a USA corporation. The company would try to keep its
   promise, but when time is real bad, tough luck.  
   

2. Mainland's weapon is offensive, Taiwan's is defensive.

   It is true that the main military threat of Taiwan is from mainland, 
   but the reserve is not true.  Taiwan could hardly be considered as
   the main military threat to mainland: used to be USA, then USSR. 
   It basically need to protect her interest in South China Seas and
   all over the long borders with Russia, India, Vietnam, etc.  I think
   it would be ill-advise to perceive every purchase of military
   hardware by PRC is against Taiwan.

3. About the F16's purchase...

   I guess it wouldn't be complete if I didn't tell you what I think
   about the purchase: while I think it is money not well-spent to 
   buy the F16s, if the deal is perceived to give Taiwan much greater 
   deterrent from wanton aggression and give a greater level of security,
   then go ahead.  It is like an insurance: you probably don't want
   to make use of it, but it gives you peace of mind.

   Personally, if I am a policy maker of USA, I will laugh to the bank: 
   not only USA'll get a big fat order, they also have upset the status quo.
   So much so that the economic co-operation between mainland and Taiwan might
   be slowed down or impaired.  Music to the ears to have a weaken China!

-cw-
_____________________________________________________________________________
C.W.Chung       Objectivity Inc.      Object DBMS (ODBMS)   Tel: 415/688-8023
                800 El Camino Real,   Menlo Park CA 94025   Fax: 415/325-0939
                                      email: cw@objy.com    or  uunet!objy!cw
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china