|
Alternative
perspectives to the ROC ideology key
By Lee Min-yung §õ±Ó«i
When Taiwan was still under Japanese colonial rule, the Republic of China (ROC),
which had overthrown the Qing Dynasty, wanted Taiwan to be independent and
self-sufficient. This was the wish of both ROC founder Sun Yat-sen (®]¶h¥P) and
Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Mao Zedong (¤ò¿AªF).
In 1949, following the establishment of the People¡¦s Republic of China (PRC),
the ROC continued to exist, albeit in exile, when the Chinese Nationalist Party
(KMT) occupied Taiwan. After that, when China talked of liberating Taiwan, it
meant overthrowing the KMT-led ROC ¡X what the PRC rulers called Chiang
Kai-shek¡¦s (½±¤¶¥Û) bandit party-state.
The tension involved in Taiwan¡¦s China issue and China¡¦s Taiwan issue revolves
around the longstanding dispute between the PRC that controls China and the KMT
that used to, and now again governs Taiwan. In the past, the former was mainly
backed by the Soviet Union, while the latter had the support of the US.
While appearances suggested this rested on an ideological face-off between the
two major powers at the time, it was essentially rooted in the logic of Chinese
nationalism. From a position of ¡§gentlemen do not stand with thieves¡¨ to ¡§oh,
all right, then,¡¨ Taiwan has found it nigh on impossible to extricate itself
from China. The KMT occupied Taiwan under the ideology of representing China and
governs it as the government of the ROC. The PRC¡¦s CCP employs this same China
ideology in its dealings with Taiwan, using the KMT as its pawn.
The situation is not the same as the Confederate States of America wanting to
secede from the US, nor is it like the Spanish or Portuguese colonies in Central
and South America seeking independence. The ROC is a state in exile, one that
exists in ideology alone, one with no land to bed down on and one that cannot
form, with Taiwan, an independent collective entity separate from China. Faced
with the PRC¡¦s rise, and dealing with the challenges of the democratization
process in Taiwan, it can only submit to a PRC seeking to use it as its proxy in
governing Taiwan. The way that the KMT is now suppressing the wave of
pro-independence sentiment in Taiwan at the bidding of Beijing has shades of the
old imperial China. This is not something that Taiwan has chosen.
Given the reality of a rising China, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and
other political parties in Taiwan need to develop an alternative perspective to
the ROC ideology that the KMT clings to. They should seek direct dialogue with
China and work together to solve the issue of an exiled China on Taiwan. Any
dialogue needs to be conducted with Taiwan in its capacity as an independent,
sovereign nation before it can discuss with China what future relations are to
be like. That is to say, Taiwanese need to choose for themselves the shape of
the relationship they would like to have with China, not to follow wherever the
KMT leads, allowing themselves to be ruled by Chinese rulers in exile.
It is not right that Taiwan has become a bargaining chip, used as the KMT sees
fit. Perhaps Taiwanese should demand that China first deal with the KMT, instead
of helping the KMT dominate Taiwan. If Taiwan is to be liberated, it should be
liberated to Taiwan. The way forward should be for the actual, subjective
Taiwan, in its own capacity, to develop relations with China anew.
If the DPP is to develop relations with China, it should first do away with this
condition that all dialogue must be conducted through the KMT. It should not
depend on the KMT for this. Taiwan needs to stand on its own feet in dealing
with China, to show some moral character and initiative.
Lee Min-yung is a poet and political commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
|
