From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Re: DATA: largest world economies
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:40:45 GMT

From article <1992Dec15.083508.11603@athena.mit.edu>, by joe@athena.mit.edu (Joseph C Wang):
> In article <1992Dec14.221718.4168@cbnews.cb.att.com> liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes:
>>Tell me with what China is able to invade Taiwan?
> 
> If the PRC is ever stupid enough to try a military action against
> Taiwan, it would most likely be in the form of a blockade.  You might
> be able to break the blockade to bring in essential supplies, but you
> will not be able to convince foreign investors to get supplied from
> war zone and Taiwan's economy (which is heavily export dependent) will
> be ruined.
> 
> Of course, any such action would be the end of any possibility of
> unification, and so I'm trying to establish a working compromise that
> is acceptable to the Taiwan electorate, so that it will not happen.
> 
> In order to prevent an invasion, Taiwan will have to do two things....
> 
> 1) Spend money on military, and
> 
> 2) Invest heavily on the Mainland so that an invasion would be
> economic suicide for the Mainland.  It is true that investing on the
> Mainland will make Taiwan less independent.  Heavy Taiwanese
> investment on the Mainland means that the Mainland will have some
> influence on affairs in Taiwan.  On the other hand, it means that
> Taiwan will have some influence on affairs in the Mainland.  Since
> both places will have influences and interests in the other place, it
> means that both will think about the actions and reactions from the
> other, and that you are likely to have peace break out.
> 
>>Taiwanese will do what we can to prevent a war. 
> 
> In order to prevent a war, you need to take into account the opinions
> and interests of all sides.  The Mainland would consider a declaration
> of independence extremely provocative and would likely react badly.
> If you would have people support the idea of a Republic of Taiwan, you
> will have to convince them that it will provide more benefits than
> risks.  Some in Taiwan, consider changing ROC to ROT good thing in and
> of itself.  Judging from the last election results, most do not.
> 
> If you want people to die for ROT, you must explain why ROT is so good
> and ROC is so bad that death is called for to change it.  If you can't
> explain why ROT is so good and why ROC is so bad, then I don't think
> that you should expect people to risk their lives and livelihood for
> the change.
> 
> My deepest desire is for peace.  I have relatives and friends on both
> sides of the straits.  If war breaks out, my cousins will literally be
> trying to kill each other.  Already once this century, war has caused
> members of my family to try and kill each other.  I have no wish to
> have it happen again.
> 
> But to prevent war and solve the political problem of Taiwan, all
> sides must recognize each others point of view and be willing to
> compromise.  In my view, a "two China policy" with increasing economic
> cooperation is the best path to peace and to a better life for peoples
> on both sides of the straits.  "Two China" seems acceptable to the
> Taiwan electorate, to the current government on Taiwan, and the
> People's Republic seems willing to unofficially tolerate it, if it
> means greater economic interlinks with the ROC.  I think it is
> workable compromise that will someday lead to a "one China" which will
> benefit those on both sides of the straits.
> 
>>Kind of curious, China hates (or dislikes) Imperialism. And now you
>>establish new Imperialism. Isn't it a shame?
> 
> Do not mistake my views for those of other people.  In order to deal
> with a situation, I must understand the views of those I disagree
> strongly with.  This includes the views of the Beijing government.
> 
> If I were in charge of the Beijing government, I would immediately
> accept Lee Deng-Hui's offer of joint PRC/ROC recognition, offer to
> jointly reduce the weapons in the Taiwan Straits, and set up joint
> committees on economic cooperation.  I would also accelerate the pace
> of political reform on the Mainland.  After a ten to twenty year
> transition period in which the Taiwan electorate can be convinced that
> their interests can be served by new all-Chinese government, I would
> have brought up the idea of abolishing both the PRC and ROC, and
> creating a new all-Chinese government.
> 
> But I am not in charge of the Beijing government and I do not have
> access to the Beijing government.  I do have access to some of the
> Taiwan electorate and to some members of the Mainland, and so I am
> using this access to convince them that "two China" is the best
> solution to the political status of Taiwan.  
> 
> I, personally, have no power.  The only way that my ideas can be
> accepted is by the force and logic of the arguments I present.  The
> only way that my ideas can be defeated is showing their flaws.
> 
> Is this not the essence of what we are trying to achieve?
> 
> 

I really appreciate your good comment.


Heng-Hsin

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan