|
The Taidu: Self-denial and use of semantics to obfuscate reunification
Lau Guan Kim Updated: 2004-04-21 09:32
The English translation of Dutch surrender accepted by China's Koxinga was in the 17th Century, not 15th Century as claimed by one Taidu - that China's claim on Taiwan is old and obsolete.
The Taidu has conveniently filtered off the most recent proofs showing China's ownership of Taiwan: (1) The Shimonoseki Treaty 1895, where it showed Taiwan owned by China from whom Japan accepted the surrender terms, and (2) The Cairo Declaration, where again the US and England, two of the Big 3 (China being the other declarant) mentioned Taiwan (Formosa) and other territories stolen by Japan to be returned to China, then known as the Republic of China under the KMT.
What we see now, as was the case when there were near-collision course between China and Taiwan, many separatists suddenly converged on several forums espousing their self-denial and their disingenuous interpretation of two words: (1) support and (2) acknowledge.
When the US said it did not support Taiwan independence, the Taidu in a state of self-gratification, loudly proclaimed through the pro-independence Taipei Time, that it meant the US did not oppose independence.
Even when G.W. Bush reiterated in no uncertain terms during the visit of Premier Wen Jiabao to the US on December 9 last year that the US opposed independence Chen Shui-bian blustered and defied G. W. Bush.
In the recent visit to China by Dick Cheney, he was known to be privately chaffed by Taiwan; he considered Chen an irritant.
On the second word "acknowledge", the Taidu (separatist) made great play on the three communiqués following the Nixon's historic visit to China in 1972. Not only was it disingenuous, it was specious as well. According to the Taidu interpretation, "acknowledge" is a diplomatic politeness by the US to mean it did not accept a One China and Taiwan its inalienable property, but just taking note of China's claim.
Well, by American Heritage Dictionary, there are three definitions that show clearly when US signed the communiqués it meant what it said. The three interpretations of "acknowledge" are: (1) to admit the existence, reality or truth or to recognise as being valid or having force, (2) to express recognition, and (3) to accept or certify as legally binding.
How can the Taidu (separatist) twist the word "acknowledge" to mean non-acceptance?
Another non sequitur to the reunification issue is the carping of the disparity of wealth distribution in China. There are social problems in many states, and more so if that state is as large as China. But the Taidu makes it seem that this is humongous and a block to reunification. This surely ignores the fact that Taiwan, as China's runaway minuscule territory, has also social problems, such as corruption and rising unemployment, as well as deep-seated ethnic problems between the different dialect groups.
China already solved some social problems, while Taiwan, being a small island, has still to solve vexing problems already mentioned above. The government of China recognises the unequal distribution of wealth and corruption. It has shifted development to the western part of China, and in combating corruption, some tangible results surfaced.
But what has these social problems to do with reunification?
Taiwan under the reunification deals has been generously promised freedom to keep its system as envisaged in the 1C2S.
When the Taidu obfuscates by throwing semantics as the red herring and better than you as comparison, one need only to realise the ludicrous position he maintains.
The Taidu throws down the gauntlet, but the reality of that challenge precludes the enormous love and patience China has for the Chinese in Taiwan.
When the Taidu challenges China it is a vision of every person in Taiwan lining up to urinate into China, he contributes good fertiliser to the Chinese agricultural efforts; but when every Chinese in China urinates into Taiwan, the people there will drown.
That must be food for thought for the Taidu making a challenge to China!
| The above content represents the view of the author only. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
