Taiwan Merely Affirmed Current Reality

Republic of China President Lee Teng-hui’s reference in July to Taiwan’s ties with the Chinese mainland as a “special state-to-state relationship” elicited considerable international attention and a wide range of interpretations. However, the statement simply reflects the historical, political and legal facts that constitute the basis for future relations between Taipei and Beijing. It does not signal a change in Taiwan’s mainland policy.

The Republic of China, founded in 1912, has solely exercised effective jurisdiction over the Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen (Quemoy) and Matsu area since Japan surrendered the territory in 1945. The ROC therefore makes no claims to the mainland area that is under the effective jurisdiction of the People’s Republic of China. These are not facts in dispute.

Lee’s point was that neither the ROC nor the PRC can claim to rule the other, yet they share common language, ethnic and, to some extent, historical ties. This makes their interaction a “special state-to-state relationship,” rather than the unequal ties of a local government to the central government, or a province to a country, which Beijing pretends to be the case. This is just a straightforward summary of the current situation that demonstrates pragmatism, continuity of policy and innovation. It is pragmatic in that the representative authority conferred upon the ROC government comes from the ballot box in free democratic elections.

It demonstrates continuity of policy because, as ROC Prime Minister Vincent C. Siew put it, “Our policy of promoting constructive dialogue and positive exchanges remains unchanged; our resolve to pursue a win-win situation in cross-strait relations remains unchanged, and our goal for a peaceful, democratic and united new China in the future remains unchanged.”

It demonstrates the innovation of Taiwan’s policy over the past decade in amending its constitution and writing the Guidelines for National Unification in 1991 to bring government policy and law in line with the ROC’s actual jurisdiction.

Pretending that the Republic of China has not existed for the past 50 years or that it has not exercised effective jurisdiction over the Taiwan area has only emboldened those in Beijing intent upon intimidation and military adventurism. Beijing has grown increasingly intolerant of any legitimate action in the international community on the part of the ROC government, no matter how minor, that does not accord with its own hard-line shift toward defining the term “one China” to mean the mainland itself.

This infringes on the fundamental right of the people of Taiwan to actual and legitimate representation in international bodies and organizations and to fair and equal representation by their elected government officials in cross-strait talks. Acknowledging the “special state-to-state relationship” between the ROC and the PRC merely accords respect of the fundamental human rights to which the people of Taiwan and all people in the world are entitled.

Beijing’s vilification of Taiwan as a “renegade province,” its refusal to renounce the use of force against Taiwan to press its specious claim over the Taiwan area and its continuing military buildup are a growing source of instability in the Asia-Pacific region. These actions only serve to undermine the possibility of meaningful cross-strait dialogue at a time when there is real hope that dialogue can be resumed.

There is a real need to clarify Taiwan’s status with respect to the mainland before the visit to Taiwan by the PRC emissary for cross-strait dialogue scheduled for this autumn. If cross-strait talks are to be meaningful and substantive, then the two parties have to regard each other as equals. Asserting the ROC government’s inherent equality in the dialogue is a far cry from advocating or promoting “Taiwan independence” and in no way implies a lesser commitment to achieving peacefully a democratic, prosperous and free China one day.

Lee’s characterization of cross-strait ties is a clear reminder that progress in cross-strait relations can never be at the expense of freedom and democracy on Taiwan or involve any sacrifice of the welfare and interests of the people of Taiwan. Mutual trust-building between Taipei and Beijing, based on reality rather than diplomatic sham, is the genuine basis of lasting peace, progress and stability for all Chinese and the Asia Pacific region.