In this post I would like to talk about the One-China
Policy. This is the policy that has been standard for every Western country.
There are three ‘pillars’ to this policy that make it abundantly clear what it
is and why it has come into existence. They
are:
- Both (the People’s Republic of) China and Taiwan (the Republic of China) claim to be the one and only China.
- There can be only one recognised political entity called China.
- The People’s Republic of China is recognized by the Western world as China.
On first glance, this approach seems reasonable: it
would be strange to acknowledge two Chinas, both of whom are out to take over
the other. It also seems that this policy leans towards China more than it
leans towards Taiwan. It makes more sense to acknowledge the PRC as China because it is so much bigger, making it a more logical candidate. Another contributing factor in my view may be the fact that China
is a much more desirable partner, be it in economic cooperation, political
cooperation or military cooperation. Taiwan is much smaller and less attractive
in that regard.
And so this has been the official US policy (and of
the rest of the Western world) with regards to China and Taiwan since President Nixon's visit to China in
1972. The first pillar was actually agreed on by the two
sides themselves in what’s called the 1992 Consensus. This consensus was
reached in unofficial talks held (unsurprisingly) in 1992 between Kuomintang
(KMT) and Chinese Communist Party representatives. Of course, the difference is
that the Chinese delegation claimed that China was the one and only China, and
that the Taiwanese delegation claimed that Taiwan was the one and only China.
In order to be in line with this policy, organisations such as the IOC have
invented misnomers like ‘Chinese Taipei’, which make things worse. After all,
Taipei is at the very least politically different from the state which we
recognise as China. Besides, athletes competing under this flag can also come
from other Taiwanese cities such as Tainan or Kaohsiung.
.png)
The Olympic flag of ‘Chinese Taipei’, under which
athletes that are neither Chinese nor necessarily from Taipei, compete.
In my opinion, the problem with this policy is that
it’s out-dated. Nowadays the idea of Taiwan being the Republic of China is no
longer as popular as it was. The KMT, which has held on to the 1992 Consensus,
has fallen dramatically in popularity. Taiwanese people are generally becoming
more open to independence apart from China rather than replacing over China.
Indeed, a quarter of the people who voted for Ma last time around are reported
to intend to vote for rival party (Democratic Progressive Party) leader Tsai
Ing-Wen. This shift is no coincidence, as one of the important points on the
DPP agenda is a more favourable stance towards Taiwanese independence. With the
decline of the KMT and the rise of the DPP, the desire to have a state independent
from China has seemingly grown. Therefore, the three pillars on which the
One-China policy is constructed are no longer firmly in place, weakening the
policy.
But the continued existence of the One-China policy
means that in the international diplomatic arena, Taiwan is still an outcast.
It is not recognised officially by any of the Western nations and it is no
member state of the UN. I see this as a problem. Taiwan cannot be independent
without having access to the arena of international politics and without the
support of others. The voice of a number of Taiwanese voters is being muffled
by the One-China policy. The Taiwanese wish for independence cannot be
satisfied as long as it is in place. So if we truly want to embrace democracy,
perhaps it is time to reconsider our options.
