SELLING OUT TAIWAN
George Jonas on the growing crisis in the Strait of Taiwan
by George Jonas
National Post
March 14, 2005

Things may be looking up for democracy in the Near
East, but the Far East is a different story. By the end of
today, China's figurehead "parliament" will have
rubber-stamped Beijing's new anti-secession law.
China's rulers are giving themselves the green light to invade Taiwan.

They may not need to bother. The world seems ready to hand democratic
Taiwan -- a.k.a. the Republic
of China -- to Mao Tse-Tung's heirs on a platter.

The proposed law authorizes the mainland government to take military
measures if Taiwan does
anything the Chinese leadership interprets as a move toward independence.
What such a move might
be is anybody's guess. For China, the mere existence of Taiwan is a casus
belli.

The conflict that may extinguish the only democracy in Chinese history is
rooted in a doctrine both
Washington and Beijing share. This "one-China policy" dates back to 1949,
when the retreating forces
of General Chiang Kai-shek's Kuomintang (Nationalist) Party set up house on
the picturesque island. For
the next half century, until March, 2000, the Kuomintang ruled Taiwan.
Communists and Nationalists
were snarling at each other across the 160 kilometres of the Taiwan Strait,
agreeing about nothing
except that mainland China and Taiwan were one country.

While official Beijing was busy claiming Taiwan for the Communists and
official Taipei was busy
claiming the mainland for the Kuomintang, the island grew from a military
base governed by martial
law into a prosperous and increasingly free republic of some 23 million
souls. The people of Taiwan
developed a strong sense of being Taiwanese. When martial law was finally
lifted in 1987, the island's
voters began expressing their own views on matters.

The new generation had no more interest in recapturing the mainland for the
Kuomintang than in
reuniting with a Red Chinese motherland, whether under a Hong-Kong style
"one country, two systems"
formula or otherwise. People wanted to live in a country, not in one of
China's "special administrative
districts." Nor were they as keen as Washington to avoid rocking the boat.
Many were prepared to rock
the boat a little for a chance to retain free-market democracy.

The voters' opportunity came five years ago, in the second presidential
election in Taiwan's history. A
splinter candidate divided the Kuomintang vote, resulting in a narrow
victory for Chen Shui-bian's
pro-independence forces. The campaign was punctuated by dire warnings from
Beijing, but the
sabre-rattling only confirmed in many people's minds that they were making
a wise choice.

Relative to the shrill rhetoric before Mr. Chen's victory, Beijing's
reaction to the 2000 election result
was muted. To some observers, myself included, it seemed like the calm
before the storm. Beijing
ushered in the new millennium by increasing its military budget and going
on a shopping spree for
weapons. Even more ominously, retiring Chinese leader Jiang Zemin stopped
by U.S. President George
W. Bush's Texas ranch in October, 2002, just after North Korea admitted it
had cheated on a 1994
agreement with the United States and was continuing to develop nuclear
weapons.

At the time, I wrote that North Korea's nuclear program threatened grave
consequences for Taiwan. It
was a safe bet that during their Texas meeting Mr. Bush would ask Mr. Zemin
to persuade "Dear
Leader" Kim Jong-il to give up his nuclear program, which Mr. Zemin would
promise -- for a price. The
price would likely include a free hand in annexing Taiwan, or at least
discouraging it from seeking
independence.

Two and a half years later, the pieces are falling into place. Chances are
Pyongyang's aggressive stance
has emanated from Beijing all along. China is a puppet master pulling North
Korea's strings. The
Chinese leadership has orchestrated the nuclear crisis it's pretending to
mediate.

What's Taiwan's importance to China? The scenic speck in the Pacific may
seem a destabilizing
malignancy to Beijing's Communist rulers. Whether China's anti-secession
law is similar to Saddam
Hussein's infamous legislative attempt to justify Iraq's 1990 invasion of
Kuwait remains to be seen.

If Beijing only wants to preserve the status quo, it's banging on open
doors. In December, 2004, a
don't-rock-the-boat coalition won a narrow victory over Republic of China
president Chen Shui-bian's
independence coalition. There's no push for a special declaration of
independence in Taiwan.

On the other hand, if Beijing's goal is annexation, Taipei will resist.
"Since its founding, the ROC
[Republic of China] has been an independent sovereign state. Any unilateral
attempt to change the
status quo or downgrade the ROC's sovereign status runs contrary to the
common will of the people of
Taiwan and the international community," runs the resolution of Taiwan's
legislature, issued on March
4. "As the Beijing authorities plan to formulate an 'anti-separation law,'
we must solemnly call on them
to think carefully before taking action."

Unfortunately, it seems the Beijing authorities have thought carefully.
They wouldn't have gone as far
as they have if they didn't intend to go further. The Communist leadership
has been pushing the
envelope, and won't stop now without a major push back.

Who is to push, though? Taipei alone can't; the UN or the EU won't. Mr.
Bush will push in the Hindu
Kush but not in the South China Sea. Nothing would please me more than to
be wrong about this, for
the Taiwanese have built a commendable society against considerable odds
and would deserve better
than to be ruled by the thugs of Tiananmen Square for the next generation
or two -- as I'm afraid they
will be.

© National Post 2005

Printer-friendly version   Email this item to a friend