- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 750 Hour
- Reading permission
Originally posted by eye2eye at 30-3-2006 15:52
A. Lincoln insisted on one US, denying the breakup of the country. This laid a solid foundation for a prosperous US today.
USSR broke up, which shadowed a weaker Federation of Independent Countries a weakening Federation of Russia.
United, China will prosper;
Separated, China will dwindle.
When someone can prove that recognising Taiwanese independence would lead to the break-up of China, I might change my position. But personally, given that Taiwan is already independent in every other way, I can't see how "formalising" what is the case already will change anything.
eye2eye, the problem is that insisting any Taiwanese government adhere to Beijing's policy before there can be a discussion is counter-productive. It would be like if China had a territory dispute with a neighbour and it said "before we can talk, we want you to agree to give us all this land here, here & here". It's just not sensible. The most productive thing would be to find things to agree upon first to build some sort of dialogue, while putting the actual status of Taiwan on the back-burner (that way neither side would lose face).
The KMT says that it agrees with the one-China policy, but it also says that Taiwan's future is up to its own people. And its idea of the one-China policy is a vague desire to join the mainland, not an election platform. So in that respect its position doesn't help Beijing at all. If it is just about face, and agreeing to the principle for talks was just symbolic (i.e. not binding), then perhaps it could work. But I think China is expecting far too much from a change of government. In reality nothing would change, except the tone of the rhetoric coming from Taipei.
[ Last edited by mencius at 2006-3-30 06:25 PM ]