Back to Important Issues
 

Back to
Main

 Chinese Anti-Secession Law Is Disturbing the Status Quo in the Taiwan Strait

 

 

Chinese Anti-Secession Law Is Disturbing the Status Quo in the Taiwan Strait

Background:

On December 29, 2004 the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People’s Congress voted to submit a new Anti-Secession Law to the full Congress (which will convene on March 5, 2005.) The law mandates a military attack on Taiwan if Taiwan formally declares independence. The law echoes the provisions of a Defense Policy White Paper that Beijing released two days earlier in which it threatens to “crush” Taiwan if the island declares independence, and that it is the “sacred responsibility” of the PRC army to stop Taiwan from “splitting the country.”

Cross-Strait Balance:

The Anti-Secession Law initiative is an extremely provocative move by China which will permanently destroy the balance in the Taiwan Strait. The law needs to be stopped in its tracks. Why?

Enacting the law is a dangerous step which is not conducive to the creation of a healthy environment for the resumption of cross-Strait dialogue. The initiative not only constitutes another unilateral attempt by China to change the status quo, it dangerously enhances tension in the region.

By enacting the Anti-Secession Law, China seeks to define its ties with Taiwan on its own terms and the law would undermine other countries’ support for Taiwan under the pretext that these countries would be meddling in China's domestic affairs. This would strip the United States as well of its right to protect Taiwan’s security and U.S. strategic interests in the region.

Furthermore, through the Anti-Secession Law, China seeks to forge a legal basis for its plans to launch a military attack against Taiwan. The fact that the Chinese Defense White Paper was released simultaneously underscores China’s intention to solve its differences with Taiwan by military force.

The “Taiwan Relations Act,”a U.S. domestic law which has regulated the U.S.-Taiwan relationship since 1979, specifically states that the U.S. decision to establish diplomatic relations with China in 1979 rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means; and that the U.S. considers any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the U.S.

Moreover, under the Anti-Secession Law, Taiwan would be considered a part of Chinese territory. Any action contributing to Taiwan independence would be a punishable crime. This would entail that -for instance- Taiwanese businessmen operating on the mainland would run the risk of being jailed for their support of Taiwan. Overall, China’s ability to wildly interpret and enforce the law will seriously jeopardize the human rights of the people of Taiwan.

Conclusion:

The United States should STRONGLY OPPOSE China’s Anti-Secession Law, for it not only constitutes an extremely provocative move which will heighten the already tense situation in the Taiwan Strait, it also directly challenges current US policy that there should be no unilateral attempt to change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait and that the cross-Strait relationship should be determined by peaceful means.

FAPA Statement on the one year anniversary of the ASL (March 14, 2006)

FAPA Statement on the Passage of the Anti-Secession Law by National People's Congress (March 14, 2005)

 

Congressional Actions:

HCR 98 (Introduced by Chairman of International Relations Committee Henry Hyde, R-IL)

HCR 70 (Introduced by Rep. Steve Chabot, R-OH)

  • Co-sponsors ( as of March 11, 2005)

Rep Brown, Sherrod [OH-13] - 3/8/2005
Rep Rohrabacher, Dana [CA-46] - 3/8/2005
Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 3/8/2005
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 3/8/2005
Rep Mack, Connie [FL-14] - 3/8/2005
Rep Souder, Mark E. [IN-3] - 3/8/2005
Rep Norwood, Charlie [GA-9] - 3/8/2005
Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 3/8/2005
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 3/8/2005
Rep Diaz-Balart, Mario [FL-25] - 3/8/2005
Rep Diaz-Balart, Lincoln [FL-21] - 3/8/2005
Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] - 3/8/2005
Rep Beauprez, Bob [CO-7] - 3/8/2005
Rep Wu, David [OR-1] - 3/9/2005
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 3/9/2005
Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 3/9/2005
Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] - 3/9/2005
Rep Green, Al [TX-9] - 3/9/2005
Rep Hostettler, John N. [IN-8] - 3/9/2005
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 3/9/2005
Rep Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [FL-18] - 3/9/2005
Rep Andrews, Robert E. [NJ-1] - 3/10/2005
Rep Scott, David [GA-13] - 3/10/2005
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 3/10/2005

HCR 76 (Introduced by Rep. Jeff Miller, R-FL)

  • Co-sponsors (as of March 11, 2005)

Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 3/1/2005
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 3/1/2005
Rep Simmons, Rob [CT-2] - 3/1/2005
Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] - 3/1/2005
Rep Norwood, Charlie [GA-9] - 3/1/2005
Rep Green, Mark [WI-8] - 3/1/2005
Rep Moore, Dennis [KS-3] - 3/1/2005
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 3/1/2005
Rep English, Phil [PA-3] - 3/1/2005
Rep Butterfield, G. K. [NC-1] - 3/1/2005
Rep Diaz-Balart, Mario [FL-25] - 3/7/2005
Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 3/7/2005
Rep Scott, David [GA-13] - 3/8/2005
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 3/8/2005
Rep Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [GU] - 3/8/2005
Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 3/8/2005
Rep Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 3/8/2005
Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 3/8/2005
Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] - 3/8/2005
Rep Beauprez, Bob [CO-7] - 3/8/2005
Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] - 3/8/2005
Rep Johnson, Sam [TX-3] - 3/8/2005
Rep Forbes, J. Randy [VA-4] - 3/10/2005
Rep Souder, Mark E. [IN-3] - 3/10/2005
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 3/10/2005
Rep Harris, Katherine [FL-13] - 3/10/2005
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 3/10/2005
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 3/10/2005

Letter from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission to the Congressional Leaders (March 9, 2005)

Rep. Robert Andrews Writes to DoD, Urging for Aegis Sale In Light of the Chinese Anti-Secession Law

Co-chairs of Congressional Taiwan Caucus Express "Deep Concern" About Chinese Anti-Secession Law (February 17, 2005)

Congressional Statements (By date):

  1. February 2, Dan Burton (R-IN)              

  2. February 9, Ileana Ros Lehtinen (R-FL)      

  3. February 9, Tom Tancredo (R-CO)

  4. February 9, Heather Wilson (R-NM)

  5. February 10, Sherrod Brown (D-OH)            

  6. February 15, Pete Sessions (R-TX)            

  7. February 15, Michael Simpson (R-ID)

  8. February 16, Phil Gingrey (R-GA)

  9. February 17, Patrick Kennedy (D-RI)

  10. February 17, John Culberson (R-TX)                 

  11. February 17, Edolphus Towns (D-NY)

  12. February 17, Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD)

  13. February 17, John Sullivan (R-OK)

  14. February 18, Gregory Meeks (D-NY)

  15. February 18, Trent Franks (R-AZ)            

  16. March 1, Robert Andrews (D-NJ)                  

  17. March 1, Mike Rogers (R-MI)

  18. March 1, Tom Davis (R-VA)

  19. March 3, Scott Garrett (R-NJ)

  20. March 3, John Duncan (R-TX)                 

  21. March 3, Frank Lucas (R-OK)                       

  22. March 7, Kendrick Meek (D-FL)

  23. March 7, Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY)                 

Rep. Tancredo's Letter to Assistant Secretary of State Paul Kelly

 
Any questions? Please email: home@fapa.org