|
Reading the motives
in Ma’s peace proposal
By Chen Rong-jye 陳榮傑
The Japanese media recently quoted President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) as saying he was
not opposed to discussing a political agreement about unification or a peace
agreement with China. The day after that quote appeared in the Japanese press,
the presidential office criticized the report, saying it was subjective and
prejudiced. With those words still ringing in our ears, Ma then announced that
Taiwan would negotiate a peace agreement with China within the next 10 years.
This issue is extremely important to Taiwanese and the future of the nation, and
as such a national consensus needs to be achieved to ensure any proposal has the
legitimacy it needs before a formal announcement. It is therefore very worrying
to see Ma’s slipshod and rushed approach to the issue.
According to former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and current Chinese
President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), any so-called peace agreement with Taiwan would seek
to end the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Chinese
Nationalist Party (KMT), and return Taiwan to “the motherland.” This is not what
Ma means when he talks about a mechanism to prevent war between the two nations.
In 1951, Tibet was forced to sign the “Agreement of the Central People’s
Government and the Local Government of Tibet on Measures for the Peaceful
Liberation of Tibet” under threat of war. After the agreement was signed, the
People’s Liberation Army continued massacring Tibetans, revealing the agreement
to be a useless piece of paper.
A peace accord that prevents war touches on many complex issues, including the
status of the parties to the agreement, the establishment of a framework for
peace, the planning of the peace process, how to execute the agreement,
international monitoring, a restructuring of national defense, as well as
international arbitration. Every step of this process would be difficult.
Considering how China has behaved toward Taiwan, it is difficult to argue that
the environment will be conducive to the signing of a peace agreement any time
soon.
First, would it be possible for Taiwan to sign an agreement with the “Central
People’s Government” as the “Local Government of Taiwan”? If we cannot even
agree on the title of the document, how can we expect to agree on anything else?
Any peace agreement that fails to prevent war, even if it is wrapped in a pretty
package, is nothing more than a unification agreement in disguise. A peace
agreement ending a civil war between the CCP and the KMT, or a peace agreement
similar to the one signed by Tibet, is essentially an agreement for Taiwan to
return to the so-called “motherland.” Ma simply prefers to dress up this
transitional arrangement in an inoffensive way.
Furthermore, Beijing defines cross-strait issues as domestic affairs because it
wants to eliminate international interference, particularly the international
peace and safety mechanisms included in the UN Charter. There are currently no
regional security institutions that could ensure the validity of such an
agreement, nor is there a joint bilateral defense system. The only safety net
would be the US’ Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) and the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation
and Security between the US and Japan — the latter applying to areas around
Japan, including the Taiwan Strait.
Any cross-strait peace agreement would not only fail to guarantee Taiwan’s
security, it would also give China an excuse to demand that the US discontinue
arms sales to Taiwan.
Ma’s proposal is ambiguous and irresponsible. If he is not the idiot here, then
we are certainly the fools.
Chen Rong-jye is a professor of law and a former secretary-general of the
Straits Exchange Foundation.
Translated by Kyle Jeffcoat
|
