Dr. Ching-chih Chen

China's annexation bid won't work
Thursday May 12

Publish on Taipei Times, 2005/05/05

China's annexation bid won't work

By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

Thursday, May 05, 2005,Page 8

Taiwan has never been a part of China, either historically or legally, since 1895 when the Manchu-led Qing empire ceded Taiwan to Japan. Imperial Japan ruled Taiwan as a colony until 1945 when the US-led alliance defeated Japan. By virtue of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, Japan renounced "all right, title and claim" over Taiwan.

No recipient of the renounced sovereignty was designated. Cession of Taiwan without a recipient is neither unusual nor unique. In the 1898 Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish American War, Spain renounced "sovereignty over and title to" Cuba, but did not designate a recipient country.

Likewise, Libya, Eritrea and Somaliland were relinquished by Italy without recipient, according to the 1947 Treaty of Peace with Italy. In such cases, the renounced sovereignty naturally fell to the people of the relinquished territory.

Taiwan has therefore been a sovereign state for more half a century. But the government of the People's Republic of China, however, has claimed the island nation as part of China since its founding in 1949, and has repeatedly threatened to invade Taiwan. ..... The cases discussed above demonstrate that in post-World War II world, annexation of another country will not stand. In the age of freedom and human rights, the world should not and would not tolerate the subjugation of unwilling people. One former colony after another became independent after the World War II. The dissolution of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in 1991 further attested to the truth that a country that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to hold together a country that was created by means of intimidation and war.

Taiwan has developed separately from China for more than a century, to the extent that today Taiwan's people enjoy higher living standards and far more freedom and human rights than their counterparts in China. It is crystal clear that the great majority of the Taiwanese are strongly opposed to Taiwan's becoming part of a repressive China.

Taiwan is a democracy, and unification with China could never become a reality without the endorsement of the people through a referendum. It is also certain that if there is to be real peace and stability in East Asia in general

and in the Taiwan Strait in particular -- China must learn to respect human rights, international norms and the wishes of the people of Taiwan. ...

Why quarantine is the best policy

By Chen Ching-chih

Wednesday, Jan 26, 2005,Page 8 Taipei Times

On Jan. 15, Taiwan and China reached an agreement allowing direct charter flights across the Taiwan Strait during next month's Lunar New Year holidays. It is quite likely that direct trade, transport and postal ties

the "three links" -- might soon follow. Under these circumstances, the need to pay greater attention to China's threat to Taiwan's security is obvious.

In addition to military security, one must think in terms of health security: the health threat that China has historically posed to its neighbors, particularly Taiwan, must be seriously considered.

Letter to Taipei Times ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on TaipeiTimes http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/09/04/2003201586

US must be firm in its support for Taiwanese

By Chen Ching-chih陳清池

Saturday, Sep 04, 2004,Page 8

To insure peace and stability in the Strait, the US therefore cannot afford to be ambiguous.

A bellicose China is a threat to peace and stability in East Asia as well as to democratic Taiwan.

China can only be dissuaded from attacking Taiwan when it knows for sure that the US is unambiguous on the issue of aiding Taiwan.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/08/16/2003198998

Ugly Chinese nationalism exposed

By Chen Ching-chih陳清池

Monday, Aug 16, 2004,Page 8

China's national soccer team lost by a score of 3 to 1 to the Japanese team in the Asian Cup final in Beijing on Aug. 7. For the increasing number of ultra-nationalistic Chinese, losing the championship at home to the hated Japanese was simply unbearable.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/06/28/2003176874

US should recognize its true ally

By Chen Ching-chih陳清池

Monday, Jun 28, 2004,Page 8

"Mr. Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), dump your `one China' principle!" It would be fitting for US President George W. Bush to thus echo his predecessor in office, the late president Ronald Reagan, who in 1987 told the Soviet Union's Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. For China to end its "one China" principle is the only way to ensure genuine and long-lasting peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.

Beijing's principle that "there is only one China and Taiwan is a part of that China" is a fiction. Taiwan has never been a part of the People's Republic of China, which was established in 1949. In 1895, China ceded Taiwan to Japan in a peace treaty signed by the two countries. For the next half-century Taiwan was a Japanese colony. After Japan's defeat in 1945 it renounced sovereignty over Taiwan. This renouncement of sovereignty was officially confirmed in the 1951 San Francisco peace treaty signed by Japan and over 50 allied nations. Even the subsequent 1952 treaty between Japan and Chiang Kai-shek's (蔣介石) Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government only repeated Japan's renunciation of its claim to Taiwan. Neither treaty designated a specific country as the recipient of the renounced sovereignty. Therefore, Taiwan has been an independent country for the past half-century.

Indeed, until 1979 the US recognized Taiwan as a sovereign country. Unfortunately for the people of Taiwan, the process of US derecognition of Taiwan began in 1972. Seeking to detach the PRC from the Soviet camp during the Cold War and to gain Beijing's help in ending the Vietnam War, then US president Richard Nixon agreed to "acknowledge" that the Chinese on both sides of the Taiwan Strait had claimed Taiwan to be a part of China. The US government switched its diplomatic recognition to Beijing in 1979, and in the process began a stampede of nations severing their diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Taiwan had earlier been kicked out of the UN, and consequently has been isolated diplomatically since the 1970s.

The Cold War was over by the late 1980s, when the Soviet-led communist camp broke up and the Soviet Union dissolved, leaving the US as the world's sole superpower. China's leaders wisely decided to occupy themselves primarily with economic development. Yet while China has claimed that it is striving to "rise up peacefully," it has nevertheless continued to threaten Taiwan militarily.

Taiwan has been undergoing rapid and drastic changes also. In the late 1960s the nation accelerated its economic development process and by the late 1980s it had become one of Asia's four newly industrialized countries. However, it remained under the KMT government's authoritarian rule, which had begun in the 1945 aftermath of Japan's surrender when US General Douglas MacArthur entrusted Chiang and his government with the occupation and administration of Taiwan.

Under the rule of Chiang and later his son, the people of Taiwan had no real voice. But a long and painful process of democratization resulted in Taiwan being listed by the US-based Freedom House conservative think tank as one of Asia's two freest countries, Japan being the other.

Less than 10 percent of Taiwanese consider themselves Chinese. An even smaller percentage of the nation's population would want Taiwan to become part of undemocratic China. What people really want is an independent country in which they are masters of their own destiny. Having elected their president since 1996, the people of Taiwan are indeed the owners of national sovereignty. In this age of human rights, the US and other democratic nations are obligated to support Taiwan, which shares their liberal democratic values, such as respect for human rights and the rule of law.

Given a changed world and the nation's new circumstances, the US must re-assess its Taiwan policy. The US cannot afford to continue to be stuck with a Cold War-era policy based on the "one China" myth. Furthermore, at a time when the US is playing a major role in promoting its democracy worldwide, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq, Taiwan must be liberated from diplomatic isolation so that it can serve as a beacon of democracy in Asia.

One can understand why the US does not recognize Cuba and North Korea, which are both communist countries. However, it is increasingly difficult for the US to justify its refusal to recognize a free and democratic Taiwan. Instead of treating Taiwan merely as a trustworthy ally under the US' less-than-guaranteed military protection, the US must now work for Taiwan's return to the international community wherein it is a member state no less than the newly established East Timor. But first of all, the US must face reality and grant Taiwan diplomatic recognition. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/04/24/2003137921

Taiwan has earned US respect and recognition

By Chen Ching-chih陳清池

Saturday, Apr 24, 2004,Page 8

`No one should expect the freedom-loving Taiwanese to accept a brutal and dictatorial Chinese regime.'

The "one China" principle is all but dead.

Granted, Taiwan has never been part of the People's Repub-lic of China, but more importantly, over the past decade and a half, the people of Taiwan have made it increasingly clear to the international community that they do not want their country to become part of China and do not want to be placed under communist rule. This is the reality that the US, China and the rest of the world will have to face.

Opinion polls show that the percentage of Taiwanese who favor continued separation from China has increased steadily over the years, while that of those who favor unification has declined. Today, only 12 percent of people support unification.

This trend is also reflected in the outcome of the presidential election. In each of the three direct presidential elections since 1996, and despite China's military threat and verbal attacks, voters elected the presidential candidate backing independence over the candidate favored by Beijing.

On March 20, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), who has unequivocally and consistently stated that Taiwan is a free and independent country, defeated a rival who had adopted an ambiguous stand regarding Taiwan's sovereignty and who was backed by Beijing.

Chen secured just over 50 percent of the vote, an increase of nearly 12 percentage points from four years ago, when he defeated two rivals to win his first four-year term.

There is no doubt that Taiwanese identity has increased significantly over the past four years.

After nearly four centuries of alien rule, including Dutch, Manchurian, Japanese and Chinese Nationalist, the people of Taiwan have shown they are determined to exercise their hard-won freedoms and political rights to be masters of their own destiny.

Through the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally, which extended more than 450km and drew 2 million people, and Chen's re-election, the people of Taiwan have resoundingly demonstrated that they reject Beijing's "one China" principle.

Today, Taiwan is a market economy. It has a per capita income of nearly US$15,000, or 15 times that of China. More importantly, according to the US-based Freedom House, Taiwan, next to Japan, is Asia's freest country, while China is one of Asia's least free.

Taiwanese elect all their representatives, including the president, while Chinese are only allowed to elect their township heads. The difference between Taiwan and China is like day and night.

No one should expect the freedom-loving Taiwanese to accept a brutal and dictatorial Chinese regime.

It is time for the US to discard the "one China" fiction, a relic of the Cold War era, and extend diplomatic recognition to a free and democratic Taiwan. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on TaipeiTimes http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/03/18/2003106827

China's Taiwan solution: Anschluss

By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

Thursday, Mar 18, 2004,Page 8

`The Austrians appear to have thought that Austria would retain a considerable degree of separateness and only be absorbed gradually by Nazi Germany. The Austrians, however, turned out to be wrong.'

On March 13, 1938, Austrians were preparing to vote on whether Austria should be annexed by Nazi Germany. Unfortunately, they did not get to exercise their fundamental right due to the fact that Adolf Hitler's storm troopers had entered and occupied an independent, sovereign Austria the day before the vote.

Sixty-six years later in Taiwan, there is a national "defensive" referendum scheduled simultaneously with a direct presidential election on Saturday. The referendum issue has, however, become the most debated issue in the nation. Opposing the referendum, the pan-blue alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and People First Party(PFP) has essentially called for a boycott. Their rationale is that there is no need for a defensive referendum at a time when China's military threat is not imminent.

When will it be the right time for a "defensive" referendum? When Beijing is ready to invade or has already started the military attack as the pan-blue camp has suggested? Will that be way too late? Maybe we can come up with some sort of an answer by reviewing Germany's Anschluss, or annexation, of Austria before World War II.

When Austria was annexed by Nazi Germany in 1938, Austria had been a republic for only 18 years. Like today's Taiwan, where there are people who support unification with or annexation by the People's Republic of China, there were Austrians who were working for Nazi Germany's annexation of Austria. In 1935, an Austrian pro-Nazi gang murdered then-Austrian chancellor Englebert Dollfuss. In spite of the murder, the German-inspired coup attempt failed. At the time Italy was Austria's protector and Dollfuss, who had vowed to keep Austria independent of Germany, was pro-fascist and friendly with Benito Mussolini. When Dollfuss was killed, Italy sent troops to the border as a warning to Hitler to stay out of Austria. The Italian move effectively helped to kill the coup.

Kurt von Schuschnigg became Dollfuss' successor as Austria's chancellor. In February 1938, Hitler was ready to move against Austria. He presented von Schuschnigg with a list of demands, including that Austrian Nazis be left unrestricted and that top Austrian Nazis be included in Austria's government.

Germany would invade Austria if von Schuschnigg failed to act immediately.

Abandoned by Italy, which had became Germany's ally in 1937, and without hope of support from England or France, von Schuschnigg decided to give in to Hitler's demands. But he was still determined to keep Austria separate from Hitler's Germany.

On March 7, he contacted Mussolini, seeking opinion on a plebiscite. Mussolini warned that it would be a mistake to do so.

But von Schuschnigg ignored the warning and on March 9 called a national vote for March 13 to resolve the question of Anschluss once and for all.

On March 12, German troops, accompanied by Hitler himself, entered Austria, which quickly became and remained a German federal state until its liberation by the Allied Forces in 1945.

Hitler naturally would not allow Austrians to decide if they wanted Austria to be part of the Third Reich. It is also understandable that, being Hitler's ally after 1937, Mussolini discouraged Schuschnigg from holding a plebiscite. As for the rest of the major powers, the US had opted for diplomatic isolation after World War I, and Britain had chosen to appease Hitler while France was incapable of unilateral military action. Nazi Germany consequently had its way in the annexation of Austria.

Is history repeating itself in the case of Taiwan? Beijing has made it abundantly clear that China is determined to annex Taiwan. It is opposed to Taiwan's having a referendum of any sort and has strived to pressure the international community to oppose Taiwan's referendum plan. Yielding to China's diplomatic pressure and economic inducements, many countries, including the US, Japan and France, have made it known that they do not support Taiwan's referendum. For their short-term interest, these countries have buckled under Chinese pressure. It is, however, utterly impossible to imagine that Taiwan's pan-blue camp would call for a boycott of a defensive referendum designed to strengthen Taiwan's defenses against China's missile threat.

So, when will it be the right time to call for a defensive referendum in Taiwan if not when Beijing already has nearly 500 missiles targeting the nation? The planning of Saturday's referendum in Taiwan has taken close to three months, if not more. Is it possible for Taiwan to have a defensive referendum when Beijing is ready to invade Taiwan? History has shown that it was far too late for Austria to have a national plebiscite as Hitler massed troops along the Austrian border to march on Vienna.

On April 10, 1938, in order to establish his legitimacy over Austria, Hitler held his own plebiscite, and 99.7 percent of Austrians who voted were allegedly in favor of the Anschluss. It was of course an outcome secured under coercion. In addition, the majority of Austrians most likely believed that ties with Germany might promise economic revitalization for an economically depressed Austria. The Austrians appear to have thought that Austria would retain a considerable degree of separateness and only be absorbed gradually by Nazi Germany. The Austrians, however, turned out to be wrong, just as the people of Hong Kong are now realizing that they do not have much say as to how much autonomy and democracy Hong Kong will be allowed to have under Beijing's so-called "one country, two systems" framework.

On Feb. 28 over 2 million Taiwanese, or one in 10 people in Taiwan, participated in the historic Hand-in-Hand Rally to show their support for Taiwan and peace. That spectacular rally has made the world aware of the Taiwanese people's determination not to be part of the PRC. They must have their ultimate right of officially expressing their decision as to what kind of relations Taiwan is to have with China. If the time should come that a peaceful unification with or annexation by the PRC, for instance, is to be decided, the people of Taiwan should be the ones to have the final say. This, after all, is the 21st century, the century of human rights and popular democracy.

People of the democratic world ought to support the right of the Taiwanese to have a defensive referendum. However, it is sad to learn that today's Germany, under Beijing's pressure, has been urging Taiwan to forget about the referendum. Have the German leaders forgot that it was Germany that denied Austrians the right to a plebiscite and forcefully annexed Austria in 1938?

Saturday's referendum will establish that fundamental right of the people and a precedent. Even under Beijing's threat, freedom-loving Taiwanese have no reason not to participate in the referendum vote. As for the political leaders who have called for voters to boycott the referendum, they are either ignorant of historical facts or willfully irresponsible. ...

Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/02/27/2003100338

Beware China's fifth-column efforts

By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

Friday, Feb 27, 2004,Page 8

Beijing devised its so-called "one country, two systems" policy for enticing Taiwan to become a part of the PRC. The policy has since been applied to the absorption of Hong Kong in 1997 and Macau in 1999.

More than six years have passed since Hong Kong became a Special Administrative Region of China, yet Hong Kong has suffered a substantial economic downturn, and its autonomy and political freedom are in question. The way Beijing has dealt with Hong Kong, nevertheless, holds a valuable lesson for the people of Taiwan, who have wisely rejected Beijing's "one country, two systems."

Among others, Beijing's utilization of its fifth-column strategy in Hong Kong should be of particular concern to the people of Taiwan.

Yin Qian discusses China's fifth-column strategy in Hong Kong in his article "Beijing's Fifth Column and the Transfer of Power in Hong Kong: 1983-1997," in Hong Kong in Transition, The Handover Years.

Beijing has manipulated Hong Kong's humanitarian immigration program, which allows people in China to reunite with relatives in the territory, to serve its own purposes. In the 14 years from 1983, when China and the UK reached an agreement on the eventual handover of Hong Kong, until 1997, when the British officially handed over control of the territory to China, more than 83,000 "Chinese officials" entered Hong Kong as immigrants with false names and identities."

According to Yin's calcula-tions, the 83,000 Chinese "fifth-columnists" constitute 1.4 percent of the territory's total population of 6 million and more than 9.12 percent of its active voters.

In substance, these people were employed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as "an invisible hand for Beijing to level the political playing field [in Hong Kong], to boost its popular support and to consolidate its power from within. In putting in the fifth column, Beijing hoped that its future interests in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region would be accommodated and its long-term political goals catered for."

Beijing's Ministry of State Security and provincial party authorities screened the candidates for the fifth-column unit. When selected, these Chinese were in their 30s and 40s, skilled and well educated. These people were urged to contact Xinhua news agency, Beijing's official representative agency in Hong Kong, from time to time, and to turn to Xinhua for assistance when "encountering difficulties." Yin argues that this is in fact a "reporting system as well as a surveillance mechanism."

Despite repeated denials of its existence by Beijing, "the fifth column in Hong Kong was an open secret and emerged to be a far from negligible political force," Yin said. In addition, while there have been minor changes in the application of the fifth column over the years, Beijing's goal in employing the strategy has remained unchanged "to expand the CCP's political power-base and to influence the future direction of Hong Kong."

It was for the purpose of influencing the direction of changes in Hong Kong that Bei-jing used the fifth-column strategy after it had already been assured of the return of the territory by 1997.

In line with the nature and the history of the CCP, Beijing has done virtually all it can, covertly as well as overtly, to compel the surrender of Taiwan which it has had no control over whatsoever. It has employed against Taiwan a strategy similar and yet more sophisticated than its fifth column in Hong Kong.

In the last decade or so, some 5,000 retired military personnel have moved from Taiwan to China to set up businesses and thus have become targets of recruitment as spies for Beijing. Taiwan has prosecuted several such people spying for China. In addition, close to a million Tai-wanese in China are likewise targets of Beijing's recruitment as tools for its political campaign against Taiwan's continuing democratic reform. It has been widely reported, for example, that Bei-jing has been encouraging Tai-wanese businesspeople to vote for its preferred candidate in the March 20 election.

China's efforts at meddling in Taiwan's coming election even include Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) meeting with leaders of Taiwanese chambers of commerce in China.

One should also not ignore the ever-present threat of Chinese military intimidation. More wea-pons, troops and provisions have been moved into Fujian and Zhejiang provinces in the past month or so in Beijing's campaign to influence Taiwan's election.

In Taiwan itself, the number of Chinese immigrants hit 150,000 at the end of 2002. And today some 16,000 immigrant spouses from China are entitled to register to vote in the March election. This number is 0.1 percent of the total number of 16,500,000 voters.

To a large extent, according to Yin's definition, these people should be viewed as Beijing's "fifth columnists." Many Chinese wives of Taiwanese, for instance, appear to have been organized to demand for an expansion of their rights in Taiwan. And extreme China-friendly elements among the Chinese and their sympathizers have even boldly raised the PRC flag while parading in Taipei.

More importantly, according to the National Security Bureau, Chinese journalists, private Chinese citizens who frequently cross back and forth between Taiwan and China, and Chinese academics attending meetings in Taiwan have all attempted to influence Taiwan's presidential elections.

Beijing's effort, though more subtle this year than in the past, at influencing Taiwan's politics cannot be overstated. In the final analysis, such an effort must be viewed as a part of Beijing's elaborate scheme to annex Taiwan.

Finally, counteracting China's fifth-column activities is understandably difficult in a free and democratic society such as Taiwan. Nevertheless, the people of Taiwan should be fully aware of the possibility of sabotage engineered by Beijing's "fifth columnists" and their sympathizers. More importantly, the government must improve its techniques for identifying these Chinese subversives and preventing them from engaging in anti-Taiwan activities. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on TaipeiTimes http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2004/02/20/2003099462

History lessons that we must heed

By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

Friday, Feb 20, 2004,Page 8

It would be on the consciences of democratic nations, particularly the US, if Taiwan is left without a choice and forced to buckle under Beijing's threats.'

Beijing has never tired of claiming that Taiwan is part of China, despite the fact that Taiwan is by most standards an independent, sovereign state and the fact that the great majority of the people of Taiwan do not wish to live under communist rule. More importantly, China has nearly 500 missiles targeting Taiwan and has repeatedly threatened to take the island by force if it does not willingly become part of China.

China's ambition to annex Taiwan is real. The design to annex Taiwan, in more ways than one, resembles Meiji Japan's scheme to annex Korea about

a century ago. It is, therefore, essential that we understand the route Japan took to annex Korea, which it then ruled until 1945 when Korea was liberated at the end of World War II. The Japanese case should serve as a lesson not only for Taiwan but also for the US and China.

Japan formally annexed Korea through 1910's Treaty of Annexation. Prior to this, it was mainly by resorting to war and diplomacy that Japan had increasingly brought Korea into its sphere of influence. As Asia's sole emerging, modern military power, Japan fought two wars over control of Korea. In the Sino-Japanese War of 1894 to 1895, Japan decisively defeated China and forced it to sign the Treaty of Shimonoseki, in May 1895.

In addition to ceding Taiwan and Penghu, China agreed to relinquish its suzerainty over Korea. Japan was thus able to gradually bring Korea under its imperial wing. However, Japan still did not have a free hand over Korea on account of the fact that imperial Russia, likewise, had territorial designs over Korea as well as Manchuria. In the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 to 1905, Japan defeated Russia and

compelled it to acknowledge its

"paramount political, military and economical interests" in Korea, according to the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of Sept. 5, 1905.

However, to complete its dominance over Korea, Japan had to seek the diplomatic support of other major powers. In early 1902, through the Anglo-Japanese Naval Alliance, Japan secured Britain's acceptance of its interests in Korea, in return for acknowledging Britain's interests in China and later India.

Of equal importance to Japan, however, was US acknowledgement that Japan would enjoy dominance over Korea in return for recognizing US interests in the Philippines. US Secretary of War William Taft reached an agreement on the matter with Prime Minister Katsura Taro in July 1905. US President Theodore Roosevelt subsequently confirmed the agreement.

With the major powers' explicit support, Japan imposed a protectorate on Korea through the Protectorate Treaty of November 1905. Objecting to this development, the Korean royal family dispatched envoys to the Hague Peace Conference in 1907, but the conference refused to consider the protest. Failure of the international community to come to Korea's aid ultimately emboldened Japan to force a treaty upon Korea in August 1910 providing for complete annexation.

Western countries, including the UK, the US and Russia, supported Japan's annexation of Korea as a policy that would help stabilize East Asia, which was seen as beneficial to all the major powers involved.

Japanese colonialists and imperialists believed that Korea and Japan had deep historical and cultural ties and that a big-brother relationship existed between Korea and Japan to justify the annexation. Koreans, however, did not approve; they resisted Japanese colonial rule by various means. Resistance culminated in a large-scale, anti-Japanese demonstration on March 1, 1919. Japan's brutal response resulted in the deaths of thousands of demonstrators. Clearly, the Koreans were hoping that the demonstration would be seen to have been inspired by the principle of self-determination, which US president Woodrow Wilson announced in 1918, and which therefore might win international support.

Unfortunately, no major powers or the newly created League of Nations showed any sympathy for Korea. Consequently, for 35 years, Koreans suffered under harsh colonial rule until liberation.

In the early 1940s, an increasingly militaristic and expansionist Japan attacked Western colonies, including the Philippines, Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaya. So in the long run, the interests of the Western powers were not served but damaged by sacrificing Korea in their appeasement of Japan.

Is the international community making the same mistake in their acquiescence toward the claim that Taiwan is a part of China?

Let us examine China's scheme to annex Taiwan. There are

two major similarities between

the Chinese and the Japanese scenarios. First, China is without doubt the dominant Asian power today as Japan was nearly a century ago. With its military might and growing economic power, China has the kind of leverage that Japan enjoyed in the early 20th century. Second, like Japan, China today is resorting to diplomacy as well as the threat of force to annex Taiwan. Beijing has claimed that China went to war against Japan for the sake of liberating Taiwan from Japanese colonial rule as well as to resist Japanese aggression against China. After Japan's defeat, according to the Chinese, Taiwan reverted to them. It was only because of the Chinese Civil War and its aftermath that Taiwan remained a separate jurisdiction. To annex Taiwan, Beijing insists that it will resort to force, if necessary.

In reality, according to the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty between Japan and the Allies, Japan renounced sovereignty over Taiwan but designated no recipient.

China, over the years, has manipulated all countries that have diplomatic relations with it into accepting its "one China" policy, which states that there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China. In addition, Beijing has done its best to diplomatically isolate Taiwan by opposing Taiwan's efforts to join the UN and other international organizations, including the World Health Organization.

In spite of these similarities, there are at least two essential differences between the Chinese case and that of Japan. First, unlike Korea a century ago, Taiwan has enjoyed significant support from the US. While the US does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan, it nevertheless has become Taiwan's closest and most important military ally. By virtue of the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, the US is obligated to come to the aid of Taiwan if and when the nation is attacked by China.

In reminding the Chinese of its commitment to Taiwan, the US must have learned from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1991 that ambiguity can only encourage an aggressive country into miscalculating the US' position.

In any case, it is not only the legal duty of the US to protect Taiwan in case of a Chinese invasion, but also its moral responsibility to do so. Any weakening of support would contribute to other countries turning against Taiwan, as seen recently in certain countries' negative response to Taiwan's plan to have a national peace referendum. No democratic country, especially the US which has made democracy and human rights the core of its foreign policy, should assist Beijing in coercing, however subtly, Taiwan to accept Chinese annexation. No country should sacrifice democracy and the human rights of the Taiwanese under the pretense of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.

In addition to strong US support, the people of Taiwan enjoy what the Koreans lacked a century ago. Like all other peoples, the people of Taiwan are entitled to the UN-guaranteed right of self-determination in a new era of human rights and democracy. Whatever future relationship Taiwan will have with China requires the approval of its people. There is no better way than calling a referendum to reach an unchallengeable decision on such a fundamental issue.

It would be on the consciences of democratic nations, particularly the US, if Taiwan is left without a choice and forced to buckle under Beijing's threats.

The Korean resistance against the Japanese should serve as a lesson for China not to resort to coercion in its attempt to bring Taiwan under its control. For all parties involved, the consent of the Taiwanese people is essential. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2003/10/25/2003073322

The lie behind "Retrocession Day"

By Chen Ching-chih 陳清池

Saturday, Oct 25, 2003,Page 8

October 25 is Taiwan's so-called "Retrocession Day." According to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石)

head of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and ROC government until his death in 1975 -- and his followers, it was Nationalist forces who liberated Taiwan from Japanese rule and returned Taiwan to the embrace of China. The KMT consequently picked Oct. 25th, 1945 as "Retrocession Day." Their claim, however, is self-serving and groundless.

Taiwan became a Japanese colony after 1895 when Japan annexed Taiwan and adjacent islands as a reward for her military victory over China. Up to the late 1930s, major Chinese leaders such as Mao Zedong (毛澤東) had accepted that Taiwan was Japanese territory and even argued that Taiwan, like Korea, should become independent of Japanese colonial rule. In addition, after Japanese forces began their all-out attack against China in July 1937, the Chinese, both Nationalists and Communists, were busy fighting for their own survival against the invaders. The Chinese were definitely not fighting the war against Japan to liberate other nations from colonial rule.

It is an indisputable fact that the defeat of Japan in World War II was essentially a result of the efforts of the US. It was thus the US that liberated Taiwan as well as Korea from Japanese colonial rule and helped China end a prolonged military occupation. With the withdrawal of the Japanese, the supreme commander of the allied powers in the Pacific, General Douglas MacArthur, entrusted Taiwan's post-war administration to Chiang and his government.

Japan's renouncement of sovereignty over Taiwan was officially confirmed with the signing of the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty. Even the subsequent 1952 Peace Treaty between Japan and the KMT regime in Taiwan repeated Japan's renouncement of her claim over Taiwan. Neither treaty designated a specific country as the recipient of the renounced sovereignty.

In this era of human rights, this irrefutable fact can and must be interpreted in favor of the inhabitants of Taiwan. In this light, this renounced sovereignty over Taiwan, morally as well as legally, according to UN self-determination, has fallen into the laps of the Taiwanese.

It is clear that the people of Taiwan have no reason to help celebrate this "Retrocession Day," which was introduced by the KMT, and which has come to symbolize the latest instance of Taiwan falling under alien rule

the rule of the illegitimate KMT regime. As part of the ongoing process of ridding Taiwan of the residue of this alien regime, the celebration of "Retrocession Day" ought to be seriously reconsidered. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2003/07/28/2003061310

Taiwan and Wilsonian ideology

By Ching-chih Chen 陳清池

Monday, Jul 28, 2003,Page 8

In their decades-long political struggle, the Taiwanese have made great strides in gaining freedom and democracy. The time has come now for their push to claim once and for all the full right of self-determination. The means to the end is, of course, referendums. The past offers a preview of the future.

In his 14-point address to the US Congress in January 1918, President Woodrow Wilson introduced the groundbreaking concept of self-determination. After World War I, the principle of self-determination was to become the guiding light for people under autocratic and alien rule.

The Allies' military victory over the Central Powers and the subsequent Versailles Peace Treaty, that was based very much on Wilson's 14 Points, led the defeat of Imperial Germany and the autocratic Austrian-Hungarian and Ottoman empires were broken up and most subjugated ethnic minority groups were allowed independence on the basis of self-determination in the next decade or two.

The principle and practice of self-determination have become so widely accepted as a fundamental right of all peoples that after World War II it was written into the charter of the UN. As a result, with the exception of a few cases most colonial powers fairly rapidly, one after another, ended their colonial rule and allowed independence to their former colonies.

The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe in late 1980s and the slackening of East-West Cold-War tensions prefigured the dismemberment of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Over ten former Soviet republics became independent, sovereign nation-states by the end of 1991. Compared with the relatively peaceful break-up of the Soviet Union, that of Yugoslavia was violent, but four breakaway republics, Macedonia, Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia, did eventually become independent.

Finally, the UN has also played a role in making independence possible in a few cases. The most recent case is East Timor, which had been forcefully annexed by Indonesia in 1976. After over two decades of struggle for self-determination, the East Timorese were finally allowed on Aug. 30, 1999 to vote whether to remain as part of Indonesia or declare independence. In the UN-monitored plebiscite, more than 78 percent of those who cast their votes chose to break with Indonesia. On May 20, 2002, East Timor officially became the first new country of the 21st century.

As discussed, the century after 1918 is to a great extent a century of nation-states founded on the Wilsonian principle of self-determination. Now let's turn our attention to the case of Taiwan.

Taiwan was a Japanese colony from 1895, when China ceded the island to Japan, to 1945, when the defeated Japan surrendered to the Allies. From 1945 to 1952, Taiwan was a Japanese territory under the Allied military occupation. The former supreme commander of the Allied forces in the Pacific theater former general Douglas MacArthur, however, had assigned the task of actual occupation of Taiwan to the Chiang Kai-shek-led (蔣介石) army of the Republic of China. In October 1949, the People's Republic of China was founded while the leader of Republic of China Chiang fled to Taiwan with his supporters and began nearly forty years of an illegal martial law regime on Taiwan. Technically, Taiwan was still a Japanese territory until Japan formally renounced its sovereign right by virtue of the San Francisco Peace Treaty that Japan signed in 1951.

Since 1952, the status of Taiwan had thus remained undecided. It must be settled by peaceful means and based upon the principle of self-determination as prescribed in the charter of the UN. In 1987 the Chiang-imposed martial rule came to an end and democracy had its beginning when a native-born Taiwanese

Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- succeeded the presidency in 1988. Then in 1996, the people of Taiwan exercised their right of self-determination by directly electing Lee their president.

By most international standards, Taiwan is an independent and sovereign nation. The PRC's attempt to annex Taiwan is no different from Hitler Germany's Anschluss plan, which ultimately resulted in the annexation of Austria in 1938. Before the forced annexation, Hitler had prevented the implementation of then-Austrian chancellor Schuschnigg's plan for a national plebiscite to decide in favor of Austrian independence. It was only with the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 that Austria was liberated to become an independent, sovereign nation again.

Beijing's "one country, two systems" formula is indeed a sugarcoated version of Hitler's plan to annex Austria.

The widespread discontent in Hong Kong was fully demonstrated in the July 1 protest. Hong Kong is ready for wider democracy while the Beijing appointed Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) and his administration lack legitimacy. In addition, the unemployment rate has shot up to over 10 percent and real estates values have dropped by 60 percent.

The people of Hong Kong are faring a lot worse today than before the Chinese takeover. Clearly, the Taiwanese are aware of the worsening development in Hong Kong. How can China's offer of the same "one country, two systems" formula have any appeal to the Taiwanese? In fact, public opinion polls in the island nation have shown that over 70 percent of the Taiwanese asked have rejected China's annexation formula for Taiwan.

The people of Taiwan have the right to choose their own destiny. What better means for making known their decision is there than a national plebiscite? Taiwan must soon pass a national referendum law so that the people can directly participate in the decision of their nation's major policies, including Taiwan's relations with China. It is the legal as well as moral obligation of "the people of the United Nations," in the words of the UN Charter Preamble, to support the freedom-loving Taiwanese in exercising the UN-guaranteed right of self-determination. ...

Published on TaipeiTimes http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2001/06/10/89428

China's social instability threatens investors

By Chen Ching-chih

Sunday, Jun 10, 2001,Page 8

Reports of "China fever" among Taiwanese businessmen and the abundant negative results thereof for Taiwan's economy need no introduction. It is abundantly clear that cheap labor, the availability of relatively inexpensive land, a common language and the prospect of profiting from 1.3 billion Chinese consumers have enticed Taiwanese manufacturers to pour more than US$70 billion into China in recent years. More Taiwanese manufacturers are in the process of making the move. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2001/05/15/85810

Austria's Anschluss is a lesson for Taiwan

By Chen Ching-chih

Tuesday, May 15, 2001,Page 8

Austria, in its present form, dates only from 1918, after the end of World War I. Ethnically speaking, more than 95 percent of its people are German. The German language is spoken even in the small non-German areas. ...

Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2002/04/15/131933

Balance press freedom and security

By Chen Ching-chih

Monday, Apr 15, 2002,Page 8

It is not unusual for a democratic country to experience conflicts between national security and freedom of the press. With the publication of national security secrets by Next magazine and the China Times, Taiwan is currently facing its most serious crisis. The Taiwanese government subsequently raided Next's offices and is preparing to prosecute the chief editor of the China Times. As a result, a heated debate has developed over striking the proper balance between national security and press freedom. ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Published on Taipei Times http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/edit/archives/2002/12/11/186771

Resignation not the way to end the blame game

By Chen Ching-Chih

Wednesday, Dec 11, 2002,Page 8

Resignations have attained outrageous significance since Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) won the 2002 presidential election and formed the first non-KMT government in Taiwan since 1945.

...