|
Referendum on unification needed
By Edward I. Chen 陳以德
A vast majority of Taiwanese want to decide the future of their homeland for
themselves. If Taiwan were someday to be unified with China, it should only be a
result of the people’s choice. Conversely, if it were to become independent,
that, too, should be the result of the people’s choice.
Yet, under the so-called “1992 consensus” concocted by Beijing and the Chinese
Nationalist Party (KMT) government, the right of Taiwanese to self-determination
is in danger of being eradicated.
Under the scheme, the KMT has agreed to accept Beijing’s version of “one China,”
which includes Taiwan. In return, Beijing has allowed President Ma Ying-jeou’s
(馬英九) government to claim that Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China (ROC).
Ma is well aware, however, that the ROC and the People’s Republic of China (PRC)
cannot co-exist. Soon, he would have to negotiate with Beijing the demise of the
ROC and the transfer of control over Taiwan. In other words, Beijing and the Ma
government want to decide the future of Taiwan between themselves regardless of
what Taiwanese want.
It is time that Taiwanese take back the government from the China-leaning KMT
and regain the right to determine their own future. Here is my suggestion: The
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should consider making a pledge to the 23
million people of Taiwan that if it is returned to power, it would implement at
the earliest appropriate time a referendum to support or reject Taiwan’s
unification with the PRC.
Such a referendum would galvanize people into a large anti-unification group and
a much smaller pro-unification group (rather than green and blue or ethnic
Taiwanese and Chinese mainlanders).
The KMT would probably oppose the referendum and may call for a boycott as it
did during the DPP administration under president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in 2007.
This time, however, a boycott would likely fail because many Taiwanese who have
supported the KMT would nevertheless want to have a chance to reject calls for
unification.
If the KMT insists on boycotting the referendum, it runs the risk of being
labeled collaborators with the Chinese Communist Party, and its leader as the
21st-century Wu Sangui (吳三桂).
China is also likely to oppose the referendum and may even threaten to use force
to stop it, but China would then be unable to defend its claim of a peaceful
rise. Taiwanese only want to express their wishes in a peaceful manner. How can
Beijing expect the world to believe that its rise is peaceful when it cannot
even accept the peaceful exercise of the right of Taiwanese to choose their
future?
More than 115 years ago, China ceded Taiwan to Japan “in perpetuity,” an act
that triggered the long separation of Taiwan from China. It is China’s moral
imperative to seek the consent of Taiwanese on whether they are willing to
return to their erstwhile “motherland.” The threat of using force would only
stiffen people’s resolve to resist unification.
In the meantime, the DPP should assure Beijing that the rejection of unification
would not automatically make Taiwan an independent state. It would only bring
cross-strait relations back to the days of former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝)
and Chen — that is, China and Taiwan are two separate entities
The DPP should challenge China to a peaceful competition to win the hearts and
minds of Taiwanese by means of trade, tourism, and educational and cultural
exchange programs. It should make it clear that a DPP government would not be
averse to a second referendum at an appropriate future time to gauge public
sentiment on the issue of unification. Beijing still has a lot to prove that it
cares about the welfare of Taiwanese.
Will the US block the referendum under pressure from China? Such a move would be
viewed by Taiwanese as a sign of crumbling US commitment and would embolden the
pro-unification minority to openly collaborate with Beijing. Instead, the US has
every reason to encourage China to accept the challenge and peacefully compete
for the support of the people.
For the result of the referendum to be legally binding, at least one half of all
eligible voters must take part in balloting, a very high hurdle. However, the
stakes are also high. For the first time in history, Taiwanese would hold in
their hands the destiny of their homeland. All eligible voters, green or blue,
old or young, rich or poor, should exercise their right to self-determination.
Let the world know once and for all whether Taiwan is or is not a part of China.
Rejection of unification would provide the DPP government a strong mandate to
begin revising laws and reorganizing the government in a way consistent with
Taiwan’s being a sovereign state separate from China.
Edward I. Chen was the president of the United Formosans for
Independence in America from 1960 to 1966.
|
