Strait But Not Narrow

The most recent ICLP Newsletter had an article covering the talk Professor Shelley Rigger made concerning Taiwanese politics and cross-strait relations. The following is my response to the article.

Dr. Rigger makes an excellent point in stating that cross-strait relations is a fundamental issue to peace and security in Northeast Asia. However, I find that there is another way to look at the issue in light of recent events.

She mentions that cross-strait relations is unsustainable, because cross-strait relations is directly related to Sino-American relations. The cornerstone of cross-strait relations is obviously the 1992 Consensus, which both governments view as an internal agreement. However, it is another issue completely when the United States is involved. The Chinese Communist Party does not tolerate what it perceives as the United States meddling in its internal affairs when it comes to Taiwan. Therefore, allowing then-president Lee Teng-hui to make such a public appearance was perceived by the CCP as the United States’ tacit recognition that Taiwan is a separate country. The collapse of cross-strait relations in 1995 was the direct result of how the CCP wanted to rattle its sabre at the United States and those who deviated from the agreed-upon One China principle. No doubt, this is the example (or at least a major piece of evidence) for Dr. Rigger’s conclusion. However, one may also argue that cross-strait relations is inversely related to Sino-American relations. From the period of 2002 through 2007, Sino-American relations were arguably the best they have been since 1979 while cross-strait relations reached a low not seen since the 1950s. The arms package the United States proposed in 2001 was halted during this time for almost a decade, no doubt as a gesture of goodwill to the CCP. With the recent announcement of the $6.4 billion arms sales to Taiwan, the CCP has only threatened the United States. It has not significantly hurt cross-strait relations, as the CCP continues to support further talks with Taiwanese delegates about the pending Economic Cooperative Framework Agreement. There are no signs of retaliation in the form of reducing the Three Links or other ties.

Instead of saying that cross-strait relations is unsustainable, I propose shifting the idea a little to say that it is the status quo that is unsustainable. Taiwan cannot be neglected internationally as under the control of the communist regime, because the fact is that Taiwan has never been part of the People’s Republic of China. Taiwan can only increase its international presence if the CCP stops competing with it for diplomatic allies, which is has done, and if it reciprocates goodwill to show that it means what it says, as exemplified through Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Assembly. The resolution of this conflict hinges on continuing cross-strait talks and interactions. Taiwan is already the largest source of import for Mainland China, and, regardless of politics, the two economies are inextricably linked. Increasing exchanges between the two sides will also increase understanding of the different cultures on both sides thus decreasing potential for conflict. Taiwanese people have forgotten certain aspects of common cultural traditions between Mainland China and Taiwan due to a decade of false identity fabrication. Most importantly, the end of authoritarian rule on the Mainland is the ultimate goal of increased interactions from the perspective of Taipei. Increased interactions with the outside world necessitates the progressive weakening of control that the CCP has on the entire country. While in the short-term, cross-strait relations depends on Taiwan going to the negotiation table from a position of strength and confidence, in the long-run, cross-strait relations is necessary for the resolution of this issue. Cross-strait relations is not only sustainable, but it along with a resolution to this issue are inevitable. Taiwan can choose to have a say in how this conflict is resolved through increasing cross-strait dialogue and interaction, or it can be forced to accept the outcome dictated by the CCP should Taiwan choose to boycott further dialogue and interactions.

Whatever the outcome of this cross-strait issue, Dr. Rigger and I both agree on one thing: if you are interested in Northeast Asia, this is an issue you will want to study more closely.