Singapore regrets Taiwan's move on unification council
-
this is technically true.Originally posted by cheem-.-:I have been visiting a no. of US forums and brought up the Taiwan issue. The bad news is I feel many Americans support Taiwanese independence.
According to some of their forum replies, their beliefs are: China will never invade Taiwan as long as US defends it because US navy is far superior to China. Taiwan is never part of China because the mainland PRC govt never held control over Taiwan. Attacking Taiwan is like the land grab by Iraq over Kuwait and US have to intervene for the sake of "freedom". Taiwan have the right to declare independence just like US did from the Britain in 1776. Some even compared Taiwan-China to Israel-Palestine issue.
I think the US govt supports the one-China principle because it wants to maintain good relations with China as a political partner in internation affairs and break into its market for economic gain. In terms of ideals, I am sure many Americans would love to the see the free Taiwanese rising against the Communist tyrants, esp Bush. Maybe he will start another Operation Taiwanese freedom.
Formosa went under Japanese occupation when ROC lost the WW2.Japan had to give up her booty, therefore it went back to the ROC, which was still the legitimate government in 1945 and 1946, even though they were at civil war with Mao's Communist Party.
When the PRC declared itself in 1949, the ROC fled to Formosa, and set up their government there and was still recognized as the legal entity till 1979.
Yes, in 1979, the PRC became the sole arbiter of China, however we must note that ROC is now Taiwan. So tell me, where does PRC even have a say in Taiwan affairs, not at all, even before the Japanese occupation of Formosa.
If we are talking about ROC as a title, then its more troublesome.However, Taiwan as a nation should be allowed to decide for themselves.If they wish to join PRC, so be it.IF they should want to remain free, so be it. -
But deputy US State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Washington believed that Taiwan has not abolished an advisory council on reunification with China -Wednesday March 1,
2006.
2.Either US is the smartest or the foolishest by turning two blind
eyes to 'understand'that the act was not to abolish advisory council on
reunification with China . Why Chen announced to freeze(as US understood)
or abolish(almost all international saw in this way)a body of annual budget of US$30,yes thirty only.The only aim is to tease PRC.God save Taiwan!!
Anyway ,the council has been sleeping or dying for few years.
3.PRC is non negotiable on Taiwan issue.Now PRC asked for UN and other
countries to put pressure on Taiwan.If it fail,PRC have 1000 reasons
or excuses to reunificate Taiwan lah.So stupis are Chen .So poor
of Chinese on both sides of the strait.
4.CHINA: Parliament approves Taiwan anti-secession law.Time is just right
for PRC to take actions with legal support.
What PRC will do after 2 to 3 months if Taiwan do not enough to
show her intention,that is Chen's intention?
5.The worst is Chento using constitutional reform to alter the constitution's definition of Taiwan sovereignty.
What will happen if the flag or name of Taiwan ,or both,changed by Chen?
6.If Chen does,or has done, anything ,that in the eyes of PRC is already crossed the red line,do u think PRC will give Chen a chance to recitify?
The problems of PRC leaders is if on any critical moment they do not act
adequately,then himselt will be acted 'adequately'! -
Imagine if China reunites with Taiwan one day.
Their miltary might and technology will be boosted tremendously from all the US military equipment currently owned by Taiwan.
I think the US secretly fears that happening.
-
At last US woke up lah
The US is pressing its ally Taiwan to explicitly state that a body set up to promote Chinese unification has not been abolished....
A statement released by the US Department of State on Thursday night called on Taiwan to "unambiguously affirm" that Mr Chen's announcement did not abolish the National Unification Council or change the status quo.
Washington's call for Taiwan to clarify the council's status will be seen as a warning to Mr Chen not to challenge the status quo any further -
Taiwan has always been part of China, whether it is the Republic of China under the Nationalist or the People's Republic of China under the communists. The only legitimate question to ask is who should rule China (which includes the Mainland, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan).Originally posted by LazerLordz:this is technically true.
Formosa went under Japanese occupation when ROC lost the WW2.Japan had to give up her booty, therefore it went back to the ROC, which was still the legitimate government in 1945 and 1946, even though they were at civil war with Mao's Communist Party.
When the PRC declared itself in 1949, the ROC fled to Formosa, and set up their government there and was still recognized as the legal entity till 1979.
Yes, in 1979, the PRC became the sole arbiter of China, however we must note that ROC is now Taiwan. So tell me, where does PRC even have a say in Taiwan affairs, not at all, even before the Japanese occupation of Formosa.
If we are talking about ROC as a title, then its more troublesome.However, Taiwan as a nation should be allowed to decide for themselves.If they wish to join PRC, so be it.IF they should want to remain free, so be it.
I agree the Chinese people should decide who should rule them but there is no question of Taiwan being a sovereign state. Many Taiwanese are against it, Singapore is against it, the US and the UN are also against it.
However, there is no need to rush into reunification. As communist China evolves, its political system will become more acceptable in time and reunification with Taiwan will be a natural consequence. I think that will happen when China is ready to accept multi-party elections. Chinese communism will become more akin to socialism or even a 'democratic' society with strong single party rule.....like Singapore
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Taiwan has always been part of China, whether it is Imperial China under the Manchu government, the Republic of China under the Nationalist or the People's Republic of China under the communists. The only legitimate question to ask is who should rule China (which includes the Mainland, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan).
I agree the Chinese people should decide who should rule them but there is no question of Taiwan being a sovereign state. Many Taiwanese are against it, Singapore is against it, the US and the UN are also against it.
However, there is no need to rush into reunification. As communist China evolves, its political system will become more acceptable in time and reunification with Taiwan will be a natural consequence. I think that will happen when China is ready to accept multi-party elections. Chinese communism will become more akin to socialism or even a 'democratic' society with strong single party rule.....like Singapore perhaps? -
A recent statement by a U.S. official requesting Taiwan to "unambiguously affirm" it "did not abolish" the National Unification Council has revealed an "underlying level of U.S. frustration" in its dealings with Taiwan over the NUC episode, an American expert in cross-Taiwan Strait issues said Friday.
Alan Romberg, director of East Asian Studies at the Henry L. Stimson Center, said that some in Taiwan are too carried away with what they consider a "victory" - President Chen Shui-bian's move to "cease the function" of the NUC - at the risk of damaging an understanding between Washington and Taipei.
"When the U.S. negotiated the language used in President Chen's seven-point statement, it obviously felt that, whatever the nuances of the Chinese-language version, the ambiguity of the English permitted the interpretation that the NUC and Guidelines had not been abolished," Romberg said.
"Since then, however, some people in Taipei have trumpeted their 'victory' too loudly, even to the point of seeming to equate 'cease to function' and 'abolish.'... the impression among many in Washington is that there has been a breach of faith and that Taipei's claim of 'maintaining the status quo' rings hollow," he added.
Chen announced on February 27 that the NUC would "cease to function" and the National Unification Guidelines would "cease to apply," a move which he promised "does not involve changing the status quo." The announcement came nearly one month after Chen proposed that the country should seriously consider "abolishing" the council and guidelines.
Not to "abolish" the NUC and its guidelines - symbolic of Taiwan's ultimate objective of unifying with China - was one of the "five noes" promises that Chen made in his inaugural addresses of 2000 and 2004, under the prerequisite that "China has no intention of using force against Taiwan."
On Thursday, U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli issued a rare statement in written form saying, "we expect the Taiwan authorities publicly to correct the record and unambiguously affirm that the February 27 announcement did not abolish the National Unification Council, did not change the status quo, and that the assurances remain in effect."
Ereli also said that "abrogating an assurance would be changing the status quo" and that "we believe the maintenance of Taiwan's assurances is critical to preservation of the status quo."
According to Romberg, the United States had sought to avoid such a direct statement, but the way the issue has been handled has brought the situation to the point where Washington now seeks an explicit reaffirmation of earlier assurances.
"Now it's hard to hide the fact that, clever use of English aside, abolishing the council and guidelines is precisely what was intended and what Taipei thinks it has, in fact, done," Romberg said.
"Any further statements from Taipei on this or other cross-strait issues will be very closely scrutinized," he said.