Michael Danielsen Takes Steve Tsang Apart

This is a response to Steve Tsang’s (曾銳生) recent article in the Taipei Times:

[LETTERS]

Wednesday, Jun 30, 2010, Page 8
Peace across the Strait

Stop your independence referendums and create peace is Steve Tsang’s (曾銳生) simplistic recipe for peace between Taiwan and China as published in this paper (“Now is the time to forge consensus,” June 20, page 8). According to Tsang’s standpoint, Taiwan will obtain peace by abandoning the fundamental of any democracy to hold referendums on “independence.”

He leaves the impression that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should seek to create a “consensus in Taiwan” on this repressive idea, disregarding all serious studies showing that Taiwanese will refuse to surrender to such a proposal.

In addition, he ignores that Ma’s China-friendly policies seem to have contributed to his low popularity.

Tsang’s proposal resembles a Chinese proposal from 1982, known as “one country, two systems.” The starting point for this proposal was a message to Taiwan on Jan. 1, 1979, from China’s National People’s Congress.

This was further expanded on in September 1981 by a nine-point proposal, which offered Taiwan autonomy and the right to retain its own social system and military.

This offer, however, hasn’t found support among Taiwanese. Since 1993, 68 percent to 80 percent of Taiwanese have rejected it and recently more than 80 percent have said no to the “one country, two systems” proposal.

It is daunting that Tsang denegrates the 72 percent of Taiwanese who want independence by labeling them aggressive and pointing out that China does not wish to see the DPP’s “aggressively pro-independence leaders return to power.” China uses such labels for opponents of their claim to sovereignty over Taiwan. Ma only avoids being labeled as aggressive by saying what China wants to hear.

The main problem in the conflict is China. It is Beijing that makes unfounded claims to Taiwan despite the fact that Taiwan was only a province of the Qing dynasty for 10 years, from 1885 to 1895. It is China that needs to realize its indoctrinated nationalism is the source of continued tensions across the Taiwan Strait.

Democracy has a hard time when people such as Tsang consider its elimination a solution to the conflict between Taiwan and China. It is a naive illusion to have confidence in the survival of Taiwan’s democracy if it is a part of China.

DaFydd Fell has a much more progressive proposal and suggests a consensus-seeking conference where taiwanese discuss the future (“How to achieve political consensus,” June 28, page 8). A lasting peace between Taiwan and China will only come when the world listens to Taiwanese and releases them from China’s grip.

MICHAEL DANIELSEN

Chairman of Taiwan Corner, Copenhagen