From: liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao)
Subject: Re: more than 50% support TI
Organization: AT&T Bell Lab
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:09:35 GMT

From article <1992Dec29.000001.29060@nntpd.lkg.dec.com>, by li@sicvax.enet.dec.com (Tom Li):
> 
> In article <1992Dec28.183258.15056@cbnews.cb.att.com>, liaohen@cbnews.cb.att.com (Heng-Hsin Liao) writes...
>>> ...
>> 
>>Yes, I know probably the biggest percentage group of voters have the same
>>thought as you have. Some of them vote DPP for more fairness and balance.
>>Some of them vote KMT for more stability. Their votes do not speak for
>>independence or unification.
>> 
>>Speaking of "Time", the following is my opinion.
>> 
>>For unification, we can say "I have no problem with that but let's talk
>>about it say 5 or 10 years later." And after the timespan, we play the
>>same game and we can argue "Hey, Taiwan and China are just too different
>>to work things out now. Make your pace faster. We talk about it 5/10
>>years later." The question is how long we want to play this game? You
>>know the answer is controlled by China not by us.
>> 
>>That's the key thing. We have no (or few) control to the answer. It
>>could be 5 years, 10 years, 30 years, 50 years, or 100+ years. Who knows?
>>But what is Taiwan going to do in this timespan? Does 20 some
>>not-so-important countries' recognition satisfy us? Does the pace of one
>>important international organization every 2 or 3 years satisfy us? Don't
>>we care who we are and what others call us?
>> 
>>The same questions above should be asked to voters who neither
>>pro-unification nor pro-independence. No name is not a name. No policy
>>is not a policy. One of the major obstacles against Taiwan's stepping
>>toward a high-technology society is that we cannot get our fair share
>>because we are not able to speak for ourselves. Why? Don't ask others,
>>ask ourselves. As long as we stay where we are, we won't be eligible
>>for speaking for most of the cases. An island regime that claims China?
>>Not! So either get our big brother China speak for us or do something
>>ourselves.
>> 
>>For independence, it is not a matter of referendum first and things will
>>work out just fine. For example, will it be a referendum of declaring
>>independence immediately or a referendum that specify the independence
>>time frame? The latter gives us time for preparation. But it also gives
>>China time to ruin our decision. Okay, say immediate independence, how
>>many domestic issues and how many international issues will come up?
>>Constitution, laws, infrastructures, defence capability, and many more.
>>We won't be able to solve those in a short period of time. At the same
>>time, how much we need to devote to watching the reaction of China?
>> 
>>The questions above do not mean that I am pessimistic on independence.
>>What I am saying is we need to think about a lot of issues and prepare
>>for those before an independence referendum is held. The key thing is
>>this is under our own control although it won't be easy.
>> 
>>Yes, we need some "time." But what we need it for is to prepare for
>>our future instead of watching the world goes by. Sitting and watching
>>just won't work the issues out. Agree?
>> 
>> 
>>Heng-Hsin
> 
> Personally I dont support immediate independence or immediate unification. 
> But I think independence and unification are two of options for Taiwan's 
> future.
> 

I am very glad to see responses. Like some other friends said, what we need
is open-minded discussions/debates on this big issue instead of propaganda
on the two poles.

> I dont support immediate TI based on the following reasons:
> 

Let me clarify my point above. There is no chance for immediate independence
if we are talking about a time frame of 3 - 5 years. What I really mean is
that through the forth coming elections next few years, IF pro-independence
is really the trend (let's say 70%), then some of the preparation work must
be started under table. We cannot wait until the referendum and start
preparation. It would be a bad transition if that was the case. Actually,
I think it will take about 3 years or more for preparation AFTER the
independence consensus is formed. So, I neither pro immediate independence.
In fact, it is virtually impossible like immediate unification in a time
frame of 3 years given the political climate in Taiwan.

> 1. Why some TIers think we have to deny our Chinese (or Wah-Ren) identity 
> in order to support TI. Why a new nation (if necessary) can not be built 
> with Chinese/Taiwanese identity? Is there anything wrong with our Chinese 
> identity? Where did our ancestors come from?
> 

I think "Chinese" is confusing. When I say "I am not a Chinese", I am saying
"I am not a Chung-Kuo Ren." I believe almost all TIers will not deny their
inheritance. Everybody should be proud of being a "Hwa Ren". But not
necessarily everybody wants to be a "Chung-Kuo Ren." "Chinese" simply has
two major meanings that sometimes confusion just cannot be avoided.

> 2. Potential military confrontation with China if Taiwan declares independence.
> Some TIers said this is just fantasy I think this kind of response very 
> irresponsible. 
> 

Chinese military confrontation is always possible. It doesn't matter what
situation we are in. Take Hong-Kong as a example, as long as you are
against Beijing's will, they will always threaten you with force. Okay,
let's say we are unified. Both sides agree "One China, two systems" (or
whatever.) Do you think Beijing won't bother us thereafter and we "live
happily forever?"

I think what we really need is an excellent defense capability. It doesn't
matter what we do and it doesn't matter what China or other New Imperialism
do. We need to defend ourselves effectively.

> 3. After 40 years of separation and hostility have we given unification and 
> peace a chance? how do we know unification impossible and is a bad thing? why 
> people have to think unification means Taiwan will be ruled by CPP's China why 
> unification can not be two nations (ROC and PRC) under a Chinese commonwealth? 
> Why definition of unification has to be so rigid?
> 

Again, take Hong-Kong as an example on peace, don't you think people in HK
already give peace a chance? What they want is only democracy not violence.
It is China that threatened to "take over HK in 6 hours." It is China that
won't give peace a chance. The same thing to Taiwan. We always long for
peace, don't we? If it is because we make some decision that bothers China
and they madly start a war, who indeed not give peace a chance?

About other forms of unification, I think most TIers do not preclude
the possibility of commonwealth from happening. Like you say, the bottom
line is that we are a "nation." Unfortunately, both KMT and CCP don't
like the idea of "Two China" although KMT won't be against it realisticly.

The problem is it takes both sides to define the form of unification.
That means we have no control to the result. It is at best a negotiation.
If you don't like China to dominate the result, do you really want to
give it a try?

The difference is here. For independence, we control the result and we
decide the time frame. I have to say it again and again that independence
won't be cheap. We need to pay for it. But the bottom line is that
we work hard to earn us and our offspring a better living on our homeland
ourselves. That's the true meaning of independence.

> 4. We already have defacto independence certainly many of us are not 
> satisfied with the current situation. But will official independece lead 
> Taiwan to international recogintion? Or just further diplomatic isolation 
> or even war? Will independece bring us better life? Do those TIers have 
> answers? 
> 

Nobody can give the correct answers before an independence really happens,
right? Anyway, if you were a foreign country, do you think it makes sense
that Taiwan administration still claims the ownership of China and Mongolia?
Will things get better if we stay where we are? Okay, let's say we announce
that we won't make the claim anymore. Then, does it make sense that we
still use the name of "Republic of China". As long as we still use the same
name, the fact of "two China" still exist. As long as "two China" still
exist, others still have to consult with our Big Brother China (PRC) for
their positions.

Speaking of independence, will it make an even worse diplomatic isolation
than now? I really don't think so. We know what we have now. How many
countries in the world that suffer the same pain before? How many countries
support the principle of "self-determination"? In reality, we also have to
count the fact that some countries will be treatened by China. I estimate
there will be more than 20 countries recognize this new "State of Taiwan"
during the first week of independence declaration including some
"important countries". One important thing is that we need to establish
much more closer economic and other unofficial relationships with the
core countries of EC like Germany, France, and UK.

About war, I mention that before. First, we need excellent defense
capability. Second, we do what we want to do. It doesn't make sense that
because of the threat from our Big Brother China that we always do what
they say yes and don't do what they say no.

Will independence lead us a better life? For the first year or two, we
may have a hard time. I believe we definitely can get by. After that,
the answer is definitely "YES."

> The reasons I dont support immediate unification are even more clear and no
> need to mention.
> 
> Therefore, I would rather stay "status quo" until things become more clear.
> (And "status quo" does not mean we stand still there are many things we can 
> do). Before then, I think Taiwan government should legalize the TI activities 
> people have rights to know if independence is a right thing or we may really
> need it someday... in the meantime the government should speed up the culture 
> and trade etc exchange with Mainland China and establish air and sea links 
> with China ...etc so that people in Taiwan can see if unification possible. 
> After a period of time, say 10 to 20 years, Taiwan should re-evaluate her 
> position and decide what to do next.
> 

From the action level point of view, I am on your side. But I prefer an
"Action status quo, concept independence." Which means we need to prepare
for independence before we say it. 

We really don't have too much time. For a time frame of 10 to 20 years, is
it possible that we catch up with Japan, EC, and US? I am pessimistic on
this. On the other hand, is it possible that Guangdong, Fujian catch up
with Taiwan in 10 to 20 years? It is quite possible. Countries like us
heavily count on export/import. At that time, China will not only have
military threat. They will also be likely to have economic threat. I am
afraid that Taiwan will have to listen to Beijing and live a life that's
given by Beijing at that time. I believe nobody will like it.


Heng-Hsin

Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan