|
|
 |
| Letters
to the Editor --Brown
Daily Hearld |
 |
|
Taiwan Strait 'threat' is
unilateral
Margaret Kim
November 14, 2007
I am writing in response
to the columns by Eric Demafeliz '08.5 ("Taiwanese leader
must step away from the brink," Nov. 6) and Michael Boyce
'08 ("The closeness of enemies," Nov. 6) in the Nov. 6
Herald.
I write to express my disagreement with Demafeliz' column
and both columns' approaches to the "situation" in the
Taiwan Strait. Both pieces begin with the assumption that
there is a potentially dangerous international situation
between China and Taiwan and that both countries need to be
"come to the table" to prevent an international crisis. What
has not been represented to the international community in
Western media - and both Demafeliz and Boyce's essays
illustrate this silence - is the fact that the threat of any
military conflict and international crisis over the Taiwan
Strait is entirely unilateral, with China as the source. The
people of Taiwan have nearly 1,000 warheads (and as far as I
know the number keeps increasing) pointed at them about 90
miles away on the other side of the Strait in China.
Whatever "comparatively conciliatory" gestures Chinese
leaders may make, they pale in comparison to these warheads
and the long-term Chinese strategy of isolating Taiwan in
the international community.
Demafeliz may be quick to characterize the current Taiwanese
administration's promotion of Taiwan's status as a formally
independent, sovereign nation and the administration's
effort to gain entry into the United Nations as
"inflammatory" moves on the part of the administration, but
I must remind readers that these moves are the very
expressions of a solid and sound democracy on the island,
and they are widely supported by the people who live there
and make up the vast citizenry of Taiwan.
While achieving independence is a major aspiration of the
current ruling party, the Democratic Progressive Party, the
history of the Taiwanese independence movement is
intricately bound up with the history of democratization in
Taiwan. The movement for Taiwanese independence has no party
affiliation, nor does it depend on one single individual or
a group of individuals, as the opposition party in Taiwan,
the Kuomingtang, often suggests in its very personal attacks
on the Taiwanese president, Chen Shui-Bian. Taiwanese voters
may abandon Chen Shui-Bian, Taiwanese voters may abandon the
Democratic Progressive Party, but Taiwanese voters will
never abandon the cause of political independence for
Taiwan. Foreign observers need to understand the historical
contexts in which democracy movements developed in Taiwan to
understand the movement for independence on the island and
its basis in Taiwanese people's peaceful, democratic
aspirations.
I am sad to acknowledge that Demafeliz and Boyce's views may
well represent a very typical range of opinions on Taiwan in
Western media. However, for the majority of Taiwanese
citizens, these views will seem bizarre and reveal Western
ignorance about the country - and perhaps, even Western
hypocrisy about democracy. Many Taiwanese citizens do not
understand why their involvement in the movement for formal
independence, an entirely peaceful and democratic
expression, should be so shunned by Western media and
flagged as "inflammatory." If talking to China and being
"conciliatory," or "non-inflammatory" means stifling
democracy and the wishes of the Taiwanese people on how they
want to organize themselves and their own society, then it
is not a wonder that the Taiwanese independence movement
thrives on the island and the majority of Taiwanese citizens
do not pressure their leaders to "talk to" China.
I urge, in response to Demafeliz and Boyce's columns,
respect for democracy. The popular support for Taiwan's
formal and political independence is massive on the island.
Whatever the current ruling party does to promote
independence simply reflects voters' wishes. The very fact
that you see waves and waves of people rallying for Taiwan's
separate identity in recent years shows that this is a
grassroots movement from the ground up. Most Taiwanese
voters, through successive elections and political rallies,
have supported political independence. The majority of
people in Taiwan identify themselves as "Taiwanese" - not
Chinese. Whatever is interpreted as "inflammatory" by
Demafeliz is simply the expression of a popular mandate. And
the popular mandate in Taiwan for a lasting separation from
an increasingly warlike, hegemonic China is also a demand
for lasting peace over the Taiwan Strait. I must say, for
many voters in Taiwan, what beautiful expression of a
mandate - the people finally, after more than half a century
under the Kuomingtang's one-party rule, have a voice in the
Democratic Progressive Party.
Margaret Kim is a research fellow
at the John Carter Brown Library |
|
|
