It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Taiwan Nixes 'Two Sides, One China' Pitch

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2005 @ 07:03 PM
link   
The president of Taiwan has rejected a new definition of its relationship with China. The definition 'two sides, one China" was mentioned by Chinese President Hu Jintao during a meeting with the leader of Taiwan's opposition People First Party. In previous talks with Taiwan, China has demanded that the term 'One China" be used.

 



news.yahoo.com
BEIJING - China opened a new front Thursday in efforts to draw rival Taiwan into talks on their future, offering a fresh definition of their relationship — "two sides, one China" — but the initiative was quickly rejected by the Taiwanese president.

The characterization "two sides, one China" was introduced in a statement issued after Chinese President Hu Jintao met with James Soong, the leader of Taiwan's opposition People First Party.

Previously, Beijing had demanded that talks with Taipei be based on a 1992 declaration that said they are "one China" — a description that Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian has shunned as an admission that the island is a possession of the communist mainland.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Its an interesting ploy, but one only has to look as far as Hong Kong to see if it really works. Does anybody remember the "One China, Two Systems" fanfare when Hong Kong was turned over? has it really worked there? If from a economic standpoint perhaps, but the democracy demonstrations of last year is a sign, the human rights standpoint needs some work. Actions always speak louder than words and as the Taiwanese President mentioned in the article, there really is nothing new with the proposal. Merely altering symantics is simply not going to reduce the tension level.


Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Can China Invade Taiwan?




posted on May, 12 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I think all this 'one China' stuff is crazy, Taiwan needs to become a free and independent sovereign nation. Until that is done, this issue will always be a problem.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 06:13 AM
link   
As FredT astutely observed, China has already shown how empty its words truly are with poor, betrayed Hong Kong's One China, Two Systems, Three Lies. Taiwanese President Chen Shui Bian is not stupid. Nobody understands the lies of Beijing better than the Taiwanese; after all, they share the same history and culture.

In the international media, the CCP always tries to make itself out to be the patient negotiator, attempting to set up talks while Taiwan snubs its nose at them. In fact, every time a CCP political mouthpiece calls for talks with Taiwan, simultaneously a PLA spokesman will release a threatening statement basically stating that Taiwan had best come to the table or she will pay in blood. Also, whenever they make these calls for talks, it is always on the CCP's terms. They say if talks are to go ahead, first Taiwan must accept the One China principle unconditionally (now it's "Two Sides, Once China, More Lies"). That's like a boxing champion agreeing to fight a challenger, but only if the challenger agrees that the title-holder wins before the match starts. This sort of childish, sly, yet naive attitude only serves to illustrate exactly why Taiwan should NOT reunite with the mainland.

Speaking of James Soong, he is a proven Taiwanese mafia crook. He was a crook when he was in the KMT, and he remained a crook after he left. His entire year 2000 electoral campaign was funded by Triad money. I was there in Taiwan when there was a KMT-sponsored investigation into his finances. The investigation was suddenly dropped when the KMT realized that the investigators had done their job too well, and the corruption trail lead right up through the vines of the also-crooked KMT itself. If the investigation had been allowed to continue, half of the Taiwanese government would have been in jail. Later, in 2003, the KMT reopened the case to blackmail Soong into forming a coalition so that they might have a chance to beat the honest, but inexperienced DPP (Chen's party).

Soong and Lien Chan's visits to China are transparent, desperate moves to regain power. They used every dirty trick in the book to undermine Chen's position after he won in 2000, even using their influence with big business and the Triads to suppress the Taiwanese stock markets, at the expense of the Taiwanese economy, but it didn't work. Even with a coalition, the Taiwanese people still voted for Chen, which was a vote for honesty and a vote for independence. Now, Soong and Lien are sleeping with the enemy. Before Chen's victory, there is no way in blue hell that either one of them would be caught dead shaking hands with a CCP kingpin. It was all over the media here in China recently when Soong visited the graves of some of his ancestors (unlike Chen, he is a mainlander) and shed a crocodile tear when he reunited with some of his mainland relatives "after all these years". The laughable thing is, he could have visited the mainland ANY time that he wanted in the past, but he was too busy living it up on Triad money in Taiwan to care.

Chen Shui Bian - Honest man


Lien Chan - Patsy


James Soong - White Collar Triad Criminal



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
wecomeinpeace,

If Soong is a crook then what is Lee Teng Hui?

I'am sure a person of your knowledge about Taiwanese affairs would know the "bond" that those 2 shared before Lee's betrayal. Soong actively supported Lee and that was the only reason why Lee won the 1996 elections and remained as the KMT head back then.

The only reason why the KMT investigated Soong was for political gain, Soong broke away to form the PFP, the KMT were pissed off. In the 2000 elections, if it wasn't for Soong breaking away, Chen would never have being elected.

Honesty, Chen?

Ahem, the guy "shot himself" one day before the elections and magically recovered in the afternoon. Reagan took weeks to recover but not "President" Chen who was making speeches in the afternoon.

The Hong Kong protests were over Article 23, a Chinese Patriot Act as well as a slowing economy.

Betrayal of Hong Kong?

a) Britain ruled Hong Kong for 150 years without Direct Elections, China only promised to "look into direct elections", read the consititution.

Where were you calling for direct elections in Hong Kong when the British were in power?

b) Hong Kong pays no dues or taxes to the central government, it keeps all. Shanghai, for example, accounts for 1/6 of the total Chinese GDP and is distributed to all regions.

The "one-China" principle is not the 1992 consensus. It is the "One-China, different intepretations" principle, in effect, both sides agree to be China.

Think of the Taiwan issue from this perspective. Mao in 1949 changed the name of China from the Republic of China (the current Taiwan name) to the People's Republic of China and later recounted in 1970 saying that this was the biggest mistake in his life (YES, before you mention cultural revolution, he recounted that in 1976, just before his death but not then).

I tend to agree, if Mainland China still maintained the name "Republic of China", the Name founded by Sun Yat-Sen, the Taiwan issue would be solved much more readily. The current state of affairs is sad for all Chinese worldwide, in other places like Korea and Germany, people supports unification, but when it comes to China, whether due to racism or otherwise, people actively campaign against China even opposing unification with a democratic China in the future.

It's truly sad for all Chinese to still be manipulated by foreign powers.

[edit on 14-5-2005 by rapier28]



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I find it puzzling that Americans advocate a "free and sovereign" Taiwan, when if the same thing were to happen to the US.........oh, it already did. Silly me, I forgot about the Civil War when the South tried to succeed from the Union.

Lets for one moment forget about "politics" and look at the real issue. Taiwan is China's Territory and has been for a long while. The losing side (The Nationalists) in the Civil War fled there in 1947 and setup shop to oppose the Communists as it was somewhere secure the "Commies" couldn't get at them due to having bugger all naval power. It has been the status quo for nigh on 50 years.

The bottom line is that Taiwan is for all intents and purposes Chinese. Same as the Falklands or Northern Ireland is British. Or Chechnya is Russian, or what about Scotland or Wales, should they be free? ..blah blah blah so on and so forth...but you don't here the US defending their rights to "a sovereign and independent" nation do you?

Its all down to politics, simple. If the US is prepared to risk WW3 over a little island, then they should be prepared to stand up for all oppressed peoples everywhere so everyone can have their own sovereign country, but they don't. Imagine that, lots of tiny little psuedo-states where everyone is "free and sovereign", how stupid would that be? Its like going back to the bloody dark ages.

Taiwan wasn't even Democratic until the early 90's and was originally a fascist style dictatorship. The ONLY reason the US defends Taiwan is because they have this paranoid reaction to anything vaguely Communist even though the Chinese are far from being Communist, as well as the Soviets.

The US went against Communism due to its (communisms) abuse by Human Greed where communism was corrupted and rightly so the US took a stand fearing a Worldwide takeover of some uber-Dictator.

Unfortunately, the byproduct of this is an irrational fear of even European Free Health Care, wherby many of us Euro's here on this very board are branded pinko-commies (such an absurd idea it's laughable) just because we like to have the Hospital and education provided for us!

Maybe the US should have a cooling of period where they re examine what it is they are supposed to be against and standing up for.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Thank you stu.

I guess that million dollar question is this.

"Would you be against Taiwan reunification with a democratic China?"

The answer would provide a litmus test on the reasons why many are opposed to Taiwan reunifying with China. Democracy has nothing to do with it. Even the rule of law is forgotten by those people. The consitution clearly states in both Taiwan and the PRC that:

Both sides are China.

It is exactly the same as West/East Germany, North/South Korea.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
If Soong is a crook then what is Lee Teng Hui?

Yep, he's a crook too. The KMT was founded and run on Triad money, even before they went to Taiwan. We seem to agree.


The only reason why the KMT investigated Soong was for political gain, Soong broke away to form the PFP, the KMT were pissed off.

Yep. And then they called off the investigation because it was too close to home. Again, we agree. Don't know why you're arguing with me. Is it because I said something bad about the CCP?



In the 2000 elections, if it wasn't for Soong breaking away, Chen would never have being elected.

Yep, and then when the crooks teamed up again to form a powerful coalition for the next election, they still lost to Chen. The Taiwanese people had realized that someone other than the KMT could run the country.


Ahem, the guy "shot himself" one day before the elections and magically recovered in the afternoon.

I like this conspiracy theory. It's fun to think that a gunman could be so skilled as to shoot from a crowd, through a car door, and by design just graze his target. Almost as much fun as thinking that Oswald with his magic bullet was the lone gunman that assassinated Kennedy.


Reagan took weeks to recover but not "President" Chen who was making speeches in the afternoon.

Reagan received a grievous bullet-wound an inch from his heart. Chen's bullet wound grazed across his abdomen. Would you rather he stayed in hospital and pretended that the wounds were more serious than they were?


The Hong Kong protests were over Article 23, a Chinese Patriot Act as well as a slowing economy.

And Universal Suffrage. And control of the media. And control of the the Hong Kong parliament. People saw a chance for democracy after the British rule ended, but what the people want doesn't matter to the CCP.


The "one-China" principle is not the 1992 consensus. It is the "One-China, different interpretations" principle, in effect, both sides agree to be China.

Irrelevant semantics. A thorn by any other name would be just as sharp. The Taiwanese know what rule under the CCP would be like, and they don't want it, no matter what new term the CCP comes up with.


Think of the Taiwan issue from this perspective. Mao in 1949 changed the name of China from the Republic of China (the current Taiwan name) to the People's Republic of China and later recounted in 1970 saying that this was the biggest mistake in his life (YES, before you mention cultural revolution, he recounted that in 1976, just before his death but not then).

I tend to agree, if Mainland China still maintained the name "Republic of China", the Name founded by Sun Yat-Sen, the Taiwan issue would be solved much more readily.

Firstly, Mao was a nutcase and anything he said after he lost his marbles around 1966 is meaningless.

Secondly, this is again pure semantics and quite simply, moot. Whether the CCP decided to call China the "People's Republic of China", the "Republic of China", or the "Banana of Oatmeal Flakes", it doesn't change the fact that the Taiwanese people don't want to reunite with the mainland while the CCP is in power.



The current state of affairs is sad for all Chinese worldwide, in other places like Korea and Germany, people supports unification, but when it comes to China, whether due to racism or otherwise, people actively campaign against China even opposing unification with a democratic China in the future.

Does South Korea want to reunite under Crazy Kim's rule? No. Did West Germany want to reunite with East Germany under communist rule? No. Does Taiwan want to reunite with the mainland? Some do, some don't. Does Taiwan want to reunite with the mainland under the CCP's rule? No.


It's truly sad for all Chinese to still be manipulated by foreign powers.

Are you saying that the foreign imperialist running dogs forced the Taiwanese people to vote for Chen?

You can debate back and forth until the cows come home, but there's one single, defining issue to this whole debate, and that is people don't want to live in a country where they can't choose their own government. It's called democracy, and until the CCP moves into the 21st century and allows it in China, they can dream on about retaking Taiwan unless it's by force. End of story. Thanks for comin'. Watch your step.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
I find it puzzling that Americans advocate a "free and sovereign" Taiwan, when if the same thing were to happen to the US.........oh, it already did. Silly me, I forgot about the Civil War when the South tried to succeed from the Union.

Lets for one moment forget about "politics" and look at the real issue. Taiwan is China's Territory and has been for a long while. The losing side (The Nationalists) in the Civil War fled there in 1947 and setup shop to oppose the Communists as it was somewhere secure the "Commies" couldn't get at them due to having bugger all naval power. It has been the status quo for nigh on 50 years.

The bottom line is that Taiwan is for all intents and purposes Chinese.


Taiwan is not Chinese...in the Treaty of Shimonoseki, which the chinese signed, they first gave Taiwan to the Japanese in perpetuity. The Chinese dinasty, then the Chin Dynasty officials, with the help and agreement of the Taiwanese rebel groups declared the formation of the first Asian independent Republic, the Republic of Taiwan.
The Japanese did crush the rebellion, but lost about 50 years later in WWII and the coalition decided to cede Taiwan to the Chinese once more, but only for a while.

So, how exactly do you concede independence to a country then take it back when you like to?...

Not only that, but in the treaty of peace with Japan, after WWII, which officially renounced Japan's rights over the territories of Korea, Formosa (Taiwan), Antarctica, the Kuril islands, Pescadores, Spratly islands, and the Sakhalin island, no sovereignty is given to anyone over these territories.

In this peace treaty the UN charter did not give the right to any country, not even China, over any of these territories, so by default Taiwan should have been Independent since this treaty was signed in April 28 1952.

Here is a link and excerpt of the TSFT.

The document officially renounces Japan's treaty rights derived from Boxer Protocol of 1901 and its rights to Korea, Formosa (Taiwan), the Kuril Islands, the Pescadores, Spratly Islands, Antarctica and the Sakhalin Island. The treaty does not formally state which nations are sovereign over these areas, a fact that some supporters of Taiwan independence use to justify Taiwanese self-determination according to Article 77b of the Charter of the United Nations.


Excerpted from.
T reaty of Peace with Japan


---edited to fix errors---

[edit on 14-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Muaddib,
after WW2, Taiwan was clearly given back to the Republic of China under control of the Nationalists, which is the then Chinese Government. We can argue about this all day long but the fact of the matter is that the U.S gave Taiwan to China just like all of the Japanese colonies were regiven to there former owners.

eg... Singapore, Phillipines.

Evidence?

Lien Chan's father was sent from the Mainland to Taiwan prior to 1949 and the retreat of the Nationalists, he took control of the Island after it was given to the Chinese by Americans of all people.

As for the treaty in 1895, well, the French also signed a treaty during WW2 that gave France to Hitler, but when France won the war does that treaty still hold validity?

No.

The treaty in 1895 was after China lost a naval battle to Japan, hence Taiwan was annexed.

Treaties signed by western countries have long discriminated against China even when China was part of the Allies. During WW1, China sent diggers to the trenches in Europe, but after the war, Allies gave the previous German colonies in China to the Japanese.

This is nothing special.

wecomeinpeace
The shooting is not that far-fetched a conspiracy, the truth of the matter is, he could've down it without actually getting shot by a gun.


wecomeinpeace
And Universal Suffrage. And control of the media. And control of the the Hong Kong parliament. People saw a chance for democracy after the British rule ended, but what the people want doesn't matter to the CCP.


Universal Suffrage, why would you expect to have it under Chinese rule when you didn't have it under British rule considering that China don't elect they own leaders and Britain does.

Seems to me like some obtuse logic.

Control of the media??

Please, read the Reporters without Border's latest report on Hong Kong.


You can debate back and forth until the cows come home, but there's one single, defining issue to this whole debate, and that is people don't want to live in a country where they can't choose their own government. It's called democracy, and until the CCP moves into the 21st century and allows it in China, they can dream on about retaking Taiwan unless it's by force. End of story. Thanks for comin'. Watch your step.


That's a fallacy, if Taiwan were to be reunited, it would not be "One Country, Two Systems". Even the late Deng Xiaoping has said that if Taiwan were to be reunited, the only thing that would be changed was Chinese control of the foreign policy. Nowdays, even a federation is possible, Taiwan would continue to elect it's own leaders and even maintain a military.

Let's really examine the "One Country, Two Systems" in Hong Kong and Macao. Funny how no one ever mentions Macao, could it be the fact that Macao has benefited enormously under that system, people in Macao are actually safe to walk around at night now.

Let's look at Hong Kong, despite all the doomsayers, China has not;
a) Touched the judicial system, they recently overturned convictions on Falun Gong.

b) Broken any promises on universal suffrage, China only promised to look into it like it says in the consitution.

c) The economy in Hong Kong has benefitted enormously after the hand-over, during the Asian Financial Crisis, it was China that helped Hong Kong escape it's full effects.

d) Hong Kong pays absolutely no dues to China.


You can debate the merits of Article 23 all you like, but the sad fact of the matter for you Americans is that Article 23 is just a Chinese version of the Patriot Act. For example, it seeks to outlaw "Subversive" groups, in America, they called "Terrorist" groups. And also, it was dropped by the Chinese government after the protests, that seems pretty democratic to me.

EDIT:


Yep, he's a crook too. The KMT was founded and run on Triad money, even before they went to Taiwan. We seem to agree.


I think that was just a throwaway comment on your part but anyway, you know that the KMT were not founded and run by Triads. It was a legitimete political party that ruled over one of China's most tumoultous times. It was just sad that Mao and Chiang could not agree or put the best interests of the country forward after the war.

My grandmother was a KMT member and my great-grand uncle was a KMT colonel, for all it's faults, at least the KMT still remembers it's roots and it played a pivotal role in defining modern China.

[edit on 14-5-2005 by rapier28]



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Delete China's 'MFN' status. Meaning their goods can no longer be sold in America, unless under the General Preferential Treatment, GPT = Duties of the higher kind.

Knock out North Koreas' Plants of Nuclear proliferation.

And thirdly knock out or have knocked out Irans' Nuclear facilities.

Dallas



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Since we have rapier28 and wecomeinpeace on the same thread about China and Taiwan, I would love to solicit their opinions on the latest series of moves by the Chinese government ie: trade issues on fruits, presenting them with Panda's, easing travel restrictions between the two and recent reports of snub-nose golden monkeys possibly being given to Taiwan.

The timing is interesting, with the opposition just having visited and the current elections in Taiwan. What impact do you think these moves will make in the relations between China and Taiwan? Or in the opinions of the Taiwanese people?



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
Muaddib,
after WW2, Taiwan was clearly given back to the Republic of China under control of the Nationalists, which is the then Chinese Government. We can argue about this all day long but the fact of the matter is that the U.S gave Taiwan to China just like all of the Japanese colonies were regiven to there former owners.


It was not given to China, the treaty did not give sovereignty of Formosa (Taiwan) or any of the other territories to anyone...not even China. The treaty is there for anyone to read. Here is part of what happened as the treaty was signed.


The British delegate stated that "In due course a solution must be found in accord with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations." The Egyptian delegate stated that specifying the recipient is "to afford the opportunity to take into consideration the principle of self-determination and the expressed desire of the inhabitants of Taiwan." The French delegate stated that: "Taiwan's legal status must be determined one of these days, taking the wishes of the Formosan population into consideration."

It was thus the specific intention of the attendants of the San Francisco Peace Conference that the people of Taiwan should determine the future status of the island based on the principle of self-determination. Such process was not possible at the time, because the island was occupied by the losing side of China's Civil War, Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists.


Excerpted from.
www.taiwandc.org...

Here is a link to the original treaty.
www.taiwandocuments.org...


Resolution in the US Congress
In the US Congress, the 50th Anniversary of the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty was marked by the introduction of a resolution in support of Taiwan's self-determination. The resolution, HCR-221, states that it is the sense of Congress that "It is United States policy that the future of Taiwan should be resolved peacefully, through a democratic mechanism such as a plebiscite and with the express consent of the people of Taiwan". The full text can be found at www.taiwandc.org...

The resolution specifically refers to the fact that under the provisions of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan renounced all right, title and claim to Taiwan, and the status of the island was left undetermined.

The resolution then states that under the universal principle of self-determination as enshrined in Article 1 of the United Nations Charter, the people of Taiwan have the right to determine their own future. It emphasizes that the United States, as a signatory to the UN Charter, supports that fundamental right. The resolution was introduced by a bi-partisan group of Congressmen led by Rep. Bob Wexler (D-FL).


Excerpted from above link.





[edit on 14-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Mauddib

We are playing with semantics, 50 years ago, the U.S effectively gave Taiwan to the Chinese Nationalists but 50 years down the track, a piece of paper was dug up to proclaim that Taiwan was never given because it is now convinient for the U.S to have an independent Taiwan but back then Taiwan was needed to represent China in the U.N.

Taiwan is not a colony of China, Taiwan has always being part of China, it is made up of 98% ethnic Chinese. On the other hand, after the War, the U.S went to occupy the Phillipines, and the British went on to take Singapore, both colonies.

It is usually to the Victor that the treaty favours, unfortunetly, for China, even though it bore the brunt of the Japanese invasion and helped fight in both World War 1 and World War 2, China received absolutely nothing after both war, no reparations, nothing. Lets look at statistics, Russia had 25 million deaths fighting the Nazi's. China bore 30 million dead fighting the Japanese.

And now, you say that Chinese territory taken by the Japanese prior to the war should not be returned?

Duzey

Well, the elections that just took place increased the votes of the DPP by 7% and the KMT by 6% but the PFP's votes dropped significantly. However, it's hard to tell based on the National Assembly votes since only 23% of the voters turned out and both the KMT and the DPP supported the consitutional reforms.

To be honest, China has taken a really long term view on Taiwan.

If it were to become independent, i guess China is still too weak right now to do anything about it so it won't. However, don't expect any of the 1.3 billion Chinese inside China or the many outside to have empathy with western causes after that. It's not a threat or anything, just an observation on how you will forever isolate Chinese people from your point of view.

Too many observers think that the CCP wants Taiwan, that's a fallacy, the CCP is only representing the interests of the Chinese people wishing to end a chapter in the civil war.

just my 5 cents.

[edit on 15-5-2005 by rapier28]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
And now, you say that Chinese territory taken by the Japanese prior to the war should not be returned?
.......................................
To be honest, China has taken a really long term view on Taiwan.


Rapier, you are the one trying to play with semantics and not giving the true history of Taiwan.

Taiwan was not always part of China...in that you are wrong.
Taiwan was an independent country for a very long time. The Manchu rulers never bothered with the island and even proclaimed that Formosa was not part of China.



Why Taiwan is not part of China
A close look at the island's history shows that Taiwan was only very briefly a part of Imperial China (from 1887 until 1895). Before that time, it was a loose-lying area, not ruled by anyone. In fact, when the Dutch East India Company established a settlement in the southern part of the island in the 1620s, they found no signs of any Chinese administrative structure.


The people who emigrated from the coastal areas of China in the 17th and 18th century moved to the island to escape wars and famines in China, not to conquer the island on behalf of the Imperial dynasty. In fact, in the 1870s, when the governments of the United States, Japan and France protested to the Manchu emperor in Peking that pirates around Taiwan were attacking ships passing the island, they were told by the Chinese authorities: "Taiwan is beyond our territory."


In 1895, the island became Japanese territory, having been ceded "in perpetuity" to Japan by the Chinese Manchu rulers under the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895. For the following 50 years, it was an integral part of the Japanese Empire.


In 1945, it was "temporarily occupied" by the Chiang Kai-shek's troops on behalf of the Allied Forces. When Chiang lost his Civil War in 1949, he moved the remainder of his troops and government to Taiwan, and ruled with an iron fist. In the "February 28" incident of 1947, his troops massacred between 18,000 and 20,000 Taiwanese elite. The Taiwanese people, who comprise 85% of the island's population, were thus oppressed, and became unwilling pawns in a bigger chess-game between the two Chinese adversaries.


Excerpted from.
www.taiwandc.org...





The following is an excerpt from an interview with Mao Tse-tung in 1948, and what he had to say about Formosa. In the link we can find the Chinese text, plus the translation.




It is the immediate task of China to regain all our lost
territories, not merely to defend our sovereignty below the
Great Wall. This means that Manchuria must be regained. We do
not, however, include Korea, formerly a Chinese colony, but when
we have re-established the independence of the lost territories
of China, and if the Koreans wish to break away from the chains
of Japanese imperialism, we will extend them our enthusiastic
help in their struggle for independence. The same thing
applies for Formosa.
As for Inner Mongolia, which is
populated by both Chinese and Mongolians, we will struggle to
drive Japan from there and help Inner Mongolia to establish an
autonomous State.

Source: Edgar Snow, Interview with Mao Tse-tung,
quoted in "Red Star Over China",
New York:Random House, 1948, pp.88-9


Excerpted from.
groups.msn.com...


As always, the communists did not keep their word, and instead oppressed those they were supposed to set free and help.


[edit on 15-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 12:43 AM
link   
BTW, here is a link with a bit on the history of Taiwan since before the 1600s up to the present time.

voiceoftaiwan.tripod.com...

Here is another one with the same info.
www.taiwandc.org...

[edit on 15-5-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28
To be honest, China has taken a really long term view on Taiwan.


I've always felt that China has taken a long term view on this issue. They've waited a long time, they can afford to be patient with Taiwan.

As for the announcements, I saw them as an effort to try to improve their image with the general populace of Taiwan, looking ahead several presidential elections. Like we both say, they can afford to be patient. By gradually granting more and more concessions, can they sway the Taiwanese people, over the course of 40-50, even 100 years? I'm trying to look at this long-term, because I know that is how China is looking at it.

Now I've read they are talking about an underground tunnel between the two. This just seems to be a concerted effort on the part of China to improve their image in Taiwan.

As for Taiwan becoming independent, that would involve a referendum, wouldn't it? I don't see that happening, unless the people of Taiwan were to start demanding it. And if China is giving them presents, and trying to get along, they probably won't demand it, and things will stay the same for several more decades.

Just my opinion though, and always subject to change.



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

As always, the communists did not keep their word, and instead oppressed those they were supposed to set free and help.


[edit on 15-5-2005 by Muaddib]


Mauddib, i respect your comments but know that Mao also gave up outer Mongolia in return for Stalin's help in Manchuria.

It is still semantics because the Chinese Nationalists never recognised any of Mao's deals and still to this day claim Mongolia as part of China.

As regards to Taiwanese history, it was the Chinese who helped to drive the Dutch out of Taiwan, the Ming dynasty general. The Qing then took over control of Taiwan. The following quote no matter how the Pro-Independence lobby dresses it up, it is still hard to see why Taiwan was not part of China.


your dc source
In 1662 Dutch were defeated by a Chinese pirate, Cheng Cheng-kung (Koxinga), a loyalist of the old Ming dynasty, who himself was on the run from the newly established Ching dynasty. Cheng Cheng-kung himself died shortly afterwards, his son took over, but in 1683, this last remnant of the Ming Dynasty was defeated by the Ch'ing troops.


The pirate remark is a complete falsehood btw since he is actually a general from the Ming dynasty and was infact given the royal name "zhu" after the Ming emperors. The Ming emperor also changed his name to Cheng-kung meaning "success".

He was later defeated by the Qing, the Manchus.

Now, no matter how you dress up facts, it remains.

Taiwan was formally taken into Chinese control in 1662 by remnants of the Ming dynasty.

You cannot distort history.

EDIT:
Let's not argue anymore.

I do agree that attacking Taiwan would be a very bad idea, a peaceful resolution of this will occur one way or another.

Peace.

[edit on 15-5-2005 by rapier28]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Nationalistic pride is a good thing, but not when it blinds you to the injustices being done to your own country. Remember, your government is not your country. That's why countries other than China have democratic, multi-party systems.


rapier28 wrote
The shooting is not that far-fetched a conspiracy, the truth of the matter is, he could've down it without actually getting shot by a gun.

I admit there are some questions surrounding the Chen assassination attempt, but nothing conclusive.
www.cnn.com...


rapier28 wrote:
Universal Suffrage, why would you expect to have it under Chinese rule when you didn't have it under British rule considering that China don't elect they own leaders and Britain does.

Because it is the natural right of every person on the planet ever since we evolved from the days of monarchies and empires into an advanced civilization of democratic governments, AND because it would have sent a clear message to Taiwan that they had nothing to worry about reuniting with China. The CCP had a chance to show the world what it was made of...and it did. If they had allowed universal suffrage, which every person in Hong Kong wanted, maybe by now things would already be moving towards Taiwanese reunification. Opportunity missed. Oh well, guess they'll just have to keep making more missiles to point at Taiwan. That'll do the trick.



rapier28 wrote:
Control of the media?? Please, read the Reporters without Border's latest report on Hong Kong.

Maybe growing up in Australia has made you a little unclear on the subtleties of the Chinese way of doing things. If the CCP broke their promise to retain Hong Kong's freedoms for 50 years immediately and out in the open, there would be an international uproar and Beijing's reputation would be shattered, and trust in the CCP would be forever destroyed, particularly since Hong Kong is the international business hub of Asia with billions of Western dollars invested in and running through it. These things happen step by step and behind the scenes. The Chinese, in particular the CCP, are undisputed masters at this game.

Hong Kong's Muzzled Media
Muzzling a pesky free press with the least possible international reaction is a difficult act these days. Yet, in a place long regarded an oasis of free speech in Asia and renowned for its free market and entrepreneurial initiative, the solution may be at hand. In Hong Kong, pro-Beijing forces don't fight the media, they buy it.
[...]
Hong Kong's free press environment has been altered not by government action, but by the movement into media ownership of "pro-Beijing" tycoons and the use of advertising dollars as the weapon of choice in disciplining non-conforming media outlets. In a perverse twist on Hong Kong's wonderful free market environment, capital allocation and capital deprivation have come together in the media industry to serve as an effective clamp on dissenting views in Hong Kong.
[...]
Government information sources such as radio and the television station RTHK, which was modeled on the BBC, have become heavily politicized. RTHK remains independent, but there is little doubt that within a few years, and the likely ongoing management and staff changes made in deference to the political desires of the Hong Kong government, the station will resemble the old Soviet PRAVDA more than the BBC.
[...]
Billionaire tycoon Li Kai Shing, owner of Hong Kong radio station Metro Broadcasting and a major shareholder in media company Tom.com, has multibillion dollar investments in China. Television group TVB has its sights on the mainland as its growth area. Tobacco magnate Charles Ho (owner of the once mighty Sing Tao newspaper) sells cigarettes on the mainland, and the Kouk family (the South China Morning Post owners) holds dozens of major properties, including the mainland Shangri-La Hotel group. Is it any wonder that independent minded reporters and editors have a short life span with these new owners? (See China Brief, vol. 1, no. 4, by former SCMP editor Danny Gittings, "More Malaise")


The South China Morning Post, previously owned by Rupert Murdoch and the most respected English-language newspaper in Asia, was dumped by Murdoch because he didn't want to have to deal with a controlling Beijing. If you want to find the truth, go to the source. This is an article by the former Beijing Bureau Chief of the South China Morning Post, who was fired for his views on freedom of the press, regarding how "free" the paper really is.

Why I Was Fired in Hong Kong - Jasper Becker
After the handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, one of the toughest challenges facing the Chinese Communist Party was to gain control over the freewheeling media there. For more than a century, Hong Kong had been a refuge for dissenting voices in the Chinese world and the prime marketplace for trading rumors and leaks.

The Chinese-language press was the first target, and the process of subduing its boisterous members began even before 1997. Critical voices were targeted, often in creative ways. Some were flattered and won over, others bribed or threatened. Some journalists were fed stories to bring them into a collaborative and dependent relationship. Others were helped with favors; in one case Chinese officials paid the debts of a reporter's mistress.

With the South China Morning Post, the problem was more difficult. It is in English and therefore widely read in the rest of the world so it serves as a barometer of Hong Kong's freedoms, which are supposed to be preserved for 50 years under the "one country, two systems" mantra.

Thus the process of bringing it around to take a pro-Beijing stance is being carried out in a step-by-step way to avoid creating alarm. First, it was acquired by a Chinese tycoon, Robert Kuok, who has big investments in China.

Then the independent-minded editor, Jonathan Fenby, was replaced, followed by the features editor, Charles Anderson, and then Willy Lam, the China editor and prominent China-watcher, who was replaced by an editor trained at the mainland's China Daily. Other dismissals followed.
[...]
When I went to express my concerns to the editor, and my fears that the change was becoming all too obvious to readers, I was quickly sacked for "insubordination" and refusing to buckle under to the China editor.

The remolding of the South China Morning Post mirrors what is happening throughout Hong Kong. Chief Executive Tung Cheehwa has started his second term in office apparently determined to give further proof of his loyalty to Beijing. He is tightening his control over the civil service and taking other steps to lessen Hong Kong's autonomy.
Don't be fooled by Xin Hua, the CCP propaganda mouthpiece, telling you that all is well in Hong Kong. You need to dig deeper.


rapier28 wrote:
...if Taiwan were to be reunited, it would not be "One Country, Two Systems". Even the late Deng Xiaoping has said that if Taiwan were to be reunited, the only thing that would be changed was Chinese control of the foreign policy. Nowdays, even a federation is possible, Taiwan would continue to elect it's own leaders and even maintain a military.

Rubbish. It would be a farce with Taiwanese names on everything, and Beijing controlling everything from above and manipulating everything from within; the money, who gets the top jobs, who gets fired, everything. Read the article again above regarding the South Morning China Post. The Taiwanese don't believe the lies, nor does the rest of the world, so I guess the CCP must be talking to themselves. And why keep quoting the Butcher of Tiananmen? The only reason he instituted reforms was to keep the country stable and retain the CCP in power. But the reform within the party wasn't fast enough nor honest enough for the students, and that's when he decided to run them over with tanks.


rapier28 wrote:
I think that was just a throwaway comment on your part but anyway, you know that the KMT were not founded and run by Triads. It was a legitimete political party that ruled over one of China's most tumoultous times. It was just sad that Mao and Chiang could not agree or put the best interests of the country forward after the war.

Oh dear. You need to get out more and read some history books that aren't endorsed by the CCP or KMT controlled media in Taiwan. It is well-documented historical fact that the KMT were funded by, working with and infested by the Triads. Why do you think the Communists and the people of China were so pissed off? The KMT used the Triads to massacre thousands of Communists after the ousting of the Japanese. Chiang Kai Shek was a member of the "Green Gang", a suspected murderer, and a close associate of the head of that gang, the infamous underground king of Shanghai, Du Yue Sheng.

Iron, Blood Symbols of a Past Era
There is too much tension hidden in the phrase "iron and blood." It is readily associated with triads and their blood oaths. Many KMT revolutionaries were indeed triad members.

Sun Yat-sen was a member of the Red Gang and Chiang Kai-shek was a member of the Green Gang. After the Republic of China was founded, Sun drifted away from the triads, but Chiang continued to maintain a close relationship with them. He even used triads to eliminate his political enemies. Green Gang boss Du Yuesheng assisted with the slaughter of communists in Shanghai, for example.

The alliance of iron and blood between the KMT and the triads had still not been completely dissolved by the time Henry Liu was murdered in California in 1984 for writing an unflattering biography of then president Chiang Ching-kuo. Some have alleged that triads cannot be completely discounted from the 1993 murder of navy captain Yin Ching-feng as part of the Lafayette frigate scandal.


Triads
Sun Yat Sen's successor was warlord Yuan Shik Kai, who worked with the triads in corruption. The Nationalist government set up in 1927 in Nanking was headed by a known killer and criminal member of the Shang Hai Green Gang, Chiang Kai Shek. The triads took over the government of southern China, and fought the Communists, later under Mao Tse Tung, for total control. The Western powers used this "Green Tang" organized crime group to suppress any labour unrest, and to kill off communists.


The KMT today is still heavily connected to the Triads and Taiwanese big business has always been in bed with the Triads.

Lien Chan: Making Al Gore Look Exciting
...there is a long history of links between the KMT's wealth _ "gold" in Taiwan's terminology _ and the not insignificant underworld of gangs and triads _ "black" in Taiwan's political spectrum.

...A number of well-known figures in the underworld were able to "buy themselves clean" by running for office and even being elected to positions such as the Legislative Yuan and County Magistrate. The Kuomintang has traditionally condoned such activities and has done very little to stem the influence of the underworld and money in politics.



www.asiaweek.com...
Until the Liu killing, the Justice Ministry's focus has shifted more toward corruption -- with results that get more spectacular, but also more embarrassing for the government, week by week. Pingtung county chief Wu Tze-yuan, a Kuomintang politician whose career owes much to the patronage of President Lee Teng-hui, was detained on Oct. 14 over a kickback scandal involving a waste-water treatment plant. Taichung city's mayor has also been indicted in corruption charges, and Tainan city's is under investigation. A probe in Shenkeng in Taipei county revealed that virtually every aspect of town administration was influenced by triads.



starling.rinet.ru...
Taiwan is still learning how to practice democratic politics, and it still has a long way to go. Like many developing (and some developed) countries, corruption is a serious obstacle. Right now, Taiwan is ruled by corporate interests and gangsters -- yes, the Chinese mafia (the Triads, as traditionally known) have their hands in a shockingly large amount of business that goes on here.


Anyway, I'm outta this debate. I can sense myself becoming obnoxious. This is not a black and white issue like many try to make it, and there are very few "good guys" in this picture. (rapier, I'm not saying your grandparents were crooks - one can be a good Republican, but that doesn't mean Rumsfeld isn't a monster.) Taiwan's reunification with the mainland would be a good thing for all Chinese, on both sides of the strait, but it will never happen and should never happen while the CCP is in power. The fact that the KMT in Taiwan has lost some of its power and influence can only be a good, balancing thing for Taiwan's fledgling democracy, and it's sickening to see these old crooks now sucking up to Beijing in a desperate attempt to regain power.

I said it before and I'll say it again. Argue all you want about how super-fantastic and rosy-sweet the Chinese Communist Party is, but people will never want to live in a country where they can't choose their own government. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that. It's a simple thing, really, and truth-be-told, the ONLY factor stopping Taiwan from reuniting with the mainland. The CCP talks about obstacles to reunification. Pfft! They ARE the obstacle.

[edit on 2005/5/15 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by rapier28

Now, no matter how you dress up facts, it remains.

Taiwan was formally taken into Chinese control in 1662 by remnants of the Ming dynasty.

You cannot distort history.

EDIT:
Let's not argue anymore.

I do agree that attacking Taiwan would be a very bad idea, a peaceful resolution of this will occur one way or another.

Peace.


You were the one to claim that Taiwan was part of China always, which is not true.

Anyways, you are right, no matter how you dress up the facts, the Chinese gave Taiwan in perpetuity to Japan when they signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki in April 1895...then the Chinese with the help of rebel groups from Taiwan declared that Taiwan was the first independent Asian nation, by declaring the formation of the Taiwan Republic...
www.taiwandc.org...

Then, after that we also have the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, in which Formosa was not given to China. You said it yourself, you cannot distort history.

S an Francisco Peace Treaty

Taiwan is and should be an independent nation.

You are the one arguing for some reason, the facts are right there for anyone to see, but as i said, i agree with you...you cannot distort history...



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 06:36 AM
link   
wecomeinpeace

I do know about Chiang Kai-Shek's connections to Du Yue Sheng, it's common knowledge among the Chinese, my father has told me that on numerous occasions. However i don't find that to be anything special in a chaotic era.

For example, Du Yue Sheng also hid Communist Party Members as well as gurellas fighting the Japanese in his house during the anti-Japanese war. This is one of the reasons why after 1949, the Communists barely touched any of the high profile gangsters, many helped them to fight the Japanese.

In a chaotic era, like you have said, the lines are not black and white.

As for the Hong Kong media, like the Reporter's Without Borders report said, self-censorship has increased, however, it's hardly any different from other western democracies, take Rupert's Fox in the states or his News Ltd in Australia, it would be impossible to find anything in them remotely good about the Centre-left parties.

It's certainly not good, however.

Perhaps Mr Ho and Mr Packer (owns Channel 9 in Aus) could catch up in they new Casino in Macau and talk about free speech and the media.

P.S. i read the Standard, whos that owned by?? It seems to be quite dynamic.

Muaddib

Let's just end it, no one is going to change their minds.

Cheers.

[edit on 16-5-2005 by rapier28]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join