Taiwan does have a history of its own, just as all other Chinese regions do. Northeast China, where I come from, used to be called Manchuria and it used to be a State installed by Japanese in WWII. When it’s finally liberated, some of its young people were shocked to be told that they actually had been Chinese all along. They had been brought up to believe they were Japanese. As I observed from their online voices, many Taiwanese people have developed a “split personality”: they were brought up as Chinese citizens and now some of their influential politicians tell them they are not Chinese citizens.

JR, if you watch carefully what Beijing says and does, you can notice that it deals in good faith with Taiwan. It shows its best goodwill towards it in all issues except for its independence aspirations. The last thing Beijing wants to do is use force against the island where another group of Chinese people live as home and this will only happen when the aspirations go too far. Even then, the force will be against the small number of people who want independence, not the ordindary Taiwanese people. Most Taiwanese neither want reunification with the mainland nor independence Now. They made the right decision when choosing Ma as their President: as long as there is peace across the Strait, both sides have plenty of time for everything. Beijing is waiting for Taiwan to show their conditions for re-unification. As I see it, the earlier they show them the better. Because when the mainland also turned a democracy with one of the best economies in the world, Taiwan would have fewer bargaining chips. Taiwan is not Hong Kong or Macau. It functions on its own and of course will come back as something really different from the two. This diversity is good for the Chinese as a whole. Though Beijing might not agree with me here, it’s a fact at least to some extent: it promotes changes for the better.

I must say reality is very harsh for those Taiwanese who want independence from China. They will see they have no chance at all, even the least fat one.

Everyone and every country live a world in which its components are interrelated. No one single part of it can have things their own way. For Taiwan, it has been Chinese and will remain Chinese – that’s its fate.

I don’t think anyone needs to wait and do nothing about a serious disease developing in him to see what it will cause. It must be checked before it’s too late. Taiwan independence is such a disease. It means China’s health and future. Beijing well understands this and will not sit here doing nothing.

Huolong, I think this is really the faultline between your view and mine. To me, Taiwan is another state that should be in a position to make its own decisions. It’s no question that they would have to risk war if they actually held a referendum with a sufficient turnout and a majority for a declaration of independence, plus action in accordance. I think that even a referendum with a likely, but not safely predictable outcome against independence would be too much for Beijing. If they decide to make a choice, it will be a tough choice, with no predictable end result.

Most Taiwanese have a strong Chinese identity as far as I can tell, but they also have a history of their own. The opposition against martial law there was to some extent also an opposition against the mainland Chinese KMT (as it was before Lee Teng-hui became its chairman). If I were mainland Chinese (but lived through the personal experience that I have), I’d look at Taiwan with respect and say, Welcome to the motherland any time – but it has to be your choice. I have the feeling (but this isn’t meant to be unsolicited advice) that such a stance would create more sustainable unity with Taiwan than what coercion will ever achieve.

China’s power is a heavy factor and may keep the Taiwanese from an open debate about what their future should look like. Power is something that I would have to take into account myself, just as well as they do. But before accounting for the power of others, I should be aware what I consider desirable myself. I think that if there was no immediate threat of war, this would also be the natural path for the Taiwanese to take: to have a public debate among themselves, and a referendum. Only then we could say what their side of the Strait really wants.

I believe you when you say that you are a human individual first, and hope that you think of me the same way. Your position re Taiwan doesn’t change my view at all that you are yourself first. And at the same time, it’s obvious that nationality is a defining factor of our selfs (or selves).

http://tw.forum.news.yahoo.com/topic/tbn_1231469147/article/536.html

I did an interesting questionnaire by asking lots of my friends who are doctors, service people, public servant, etc.

Tons of them support Taiwan independence. But when asked if they would fight on the battle ground for it or allow their family members to do that, most of them replied: “I want Taiwan independence, but you do the fighting.”

That’s what I think too: I want Taiwan independence, you do the fighting.

http://tw.forum.news.yahoo.com/topic/tbn_1231469147/article/521.html

Please don’t use Taiwan independence as a Party line! The 23 million Taiwanese people cannot afford it!

No matter what we are told by others, we all love Taiwan. Even we die, we will be Taiwanese ghosts! Now, both Japanese and CPC (sic.) want to take advantage of us.

They let us fight among ourselves and just watch and look our chaos. Do not take seriously whether or not foreign countries recognize Taiwan or not. They all have vested interests. Arguments among ourselves can only make our economy suffer. And their countries will lose nothing. Please ponder this: what they can get because they don’t recognize us?

First, Taiwan’s internal chaos makes its people lose interest in developing economy. We’ve lost our export competitiveness and other countries will be very happy to see they have one competitor down and out. If one day, with Taiwan’s waning, we have to emigrate overseas to work as servants, they will say “Look, these Taiwanese guys are here to work as servants.” Do you think they will emphasize us?

Second, if they recognize us as independent country, they will not be able to get money donations from the CPC (sic.). If they recognize use, we give the money. They are just holding Taiwan for ransom!

…

Third, without the issue of Taiwan independence, politicians would have nothing to talk about. They talk about it only to get political power.

Forth, the Taiwanese people should first of all do a good job! The jobless rate and company bankruptcies are so high. When we are united, we are the best of the Four Asian Dragons. Money talks!

All in all, the Taiwanese people should open their eyes and put an end to elections that can be won by shouting empty slogans!

Though I cannot claim I speak for the Chinese people, I can safely say and you can safely believe that I speak for quite many of them when it comes to national sovereignty and territorial integrity. They are just hardly visible and heard in the English-speaking blogosphere.

As far as interaction with foreigners and their countries are concerned, I feel that my priority of considerations as a Chinese in order of importance should be I’m a human individual first and then a Chinese, though I often find myself believing the reserve is true.

You are right. Mylaowai’s, C.A. Yeung’s and your blogs are not meant for people like me from the Chinese mainland. And yes, I agree with you that my comments on your blog are what blogging is about: hear and be heard.

When I read posts I carefully wrote years ago (I started to “blog” in 2000 though at the time it was called “personal website”, where interactivity was not easily possible; technically, I think blogs should be a personal website form), they read as if they were written by someone else. The feeling is amazing. That’s why my posts are almost all well thought out and include hardly everyday details.

You live in a society where its members share things in common, including what you think about things and in our case about China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity. You think the same as your like-minded people do. This goes for me, too.

Your blogs and mine are all built on WordPress systems though you cannot manage WP software itself and run under someone else’s domain name. I paid for a hosting package, registered my pinyin name as my domain name for free, set up WordPress software on my (rented share of) server and go blogging. I also run a BBS (http://surefire.cn/bbs/index.php) that is about a classic Chinese novel Hongloumeng, which I’m sure you won’t like because even most Chinese people don’t bother to read it. And of course, some friends of mine have their websites on my package, too. My hosting package is provided by a U.S. company IX Web Hosting. I tried to use domestically available blog service providers (like XXX.wordpress.com) and did not like them. They have censors to delete posts and comments for no reason and without notice. So, I decided to go “independent” and moved my blogs overseas to have complete control over my own sites. You might use this against my argument of TW, HK, and Tibet and so on. Look forward to reading your Taiwan comment.

A comment in between from here, before I’m coming back to the Taiwan issue later.
You are who you are, Huolong, and don’t need to fit into Mylaowai’s ideals, mine, or anyones. That should go without saying. But I think that this “we” you are using is important. I’m not talking that much of myself as a German, maybe because that goes without saying, too. I have a strong sense of belonging to my people, but I don’t try to speak for my people. Their views on issues like the ones we are discussing are far too diverse for that.

On the other hand, I think your sense of “who you are” has very real and everyday effects on business and relations between the West and China. I got some first-hand experience of that when I was working in China myself for a Sino-German joint-venture. I realized that being Chinese mattered before anything else there – including being “ruly” or “unruly” in a business sense. Some Chinese colleagues tried to be constructive and work in a professional way, but they had the hardest time of it. As far as I know, not one of them is still working in that town, but moved on during the past years. There appeared to be an unwritten but binding law that every Chinese employee had to oblige to a policy that put their nationality first, before actual issues, legal or just practial ones. “Chineseness” meant that they had to act in the interest of their Chinese boss, including technology theft, rather than for the benefit of the joint-venture and all its stakeholders.

On the other hand, Chinese people seem to owe each other very little individually, unless they are family people, friends, or unless foreigners are involved.

To be clear, I’m not actually criticizing this. I got paid for my work anyway, and it was good money. But of course, I saw lessons for myself in this story. I understood that how I see business, international relations and the duties and rights coming with it isn’t nearly enough for me to make the right decisions. How Chinese people, including rather independently-thinking people, think of themselves should have an impact on my own decisions, too. In that way, “the way China is” has a lot to do with us Westerners, or foreigners in general.

I don’t think that either Mylaowai, C.A. Yeung, or I would blog on WordPress if we wanted to reach a mainland Chinese readership in the first place. In such a case, we’d have to choose both our blogging platforms and our words more carefully. For me, blogging is also a way to listen to myself while writing (one should have an appointment with oneself on a regular basis), and to see others react. When it is someone from mainland China, that’s just the better. But if my blog looks like one that wants to act like the little Voice of Germany to its readers, that’s certainly not my intention.

The way “you” deal with issues like Tibet, Xinjiang or Taiwan is nothing I can do a lot about, but it is something I’m observing with interest, and I think it helps me understanding who you are, although from some places in China, I have the impression that this “We” may not be exactly as binding as your line or my memory suggests. China’s actions shape my views of how “we” (by we I’m mainly referring to Germany and Europe) should interact with China.

I think these matters are worth some thoughts – and a lot of blogging.

I’ll be back tomorrow night or on Thursday. This interlude comment of mine might mess the topcial consistency of this thread up further, but anyway, it’s blogging.

thanks for summarizing your stance. Web 2.0 is good for quick reactions, but the thread system sometimes doesn’t help to keep a discussion traceable for people who join in later, especially when it goes over dozens of comments on several threads.

To be clear, I see no reason to believe that you’d comment on the behalf of anyone but yourself.
I’ll reply to your comment later today or tomorrow.

I’m against it also because the current ROC, as a state, but not its unruly Presidents Chen and Lee, views it as a state that has territorial claim to the whole of China. All this fuss is a result of a civil war between the Chinese people, which has never technically ended. This condition is reflected in both Constitutions. I cannot go further to talk about the hypothesis you made because there can be too many of it. What a difference would it make to you if the mainland’s new state name was also Republic of China? For that matter, keeping the name ROC was an idea of Mao Zedong and his close comrades, but others rejected it. In the early days of the new State, it identified itself as People’s ROC or PROC, when dealing with foreign countries and representing the country at international meetings.

The difference between Germany and China is that each side across the Strait has never recognized the other as a country or a state, that each side regards the other as part of China as it defines it. Before the mainlanders enter the island and the islanders enter the mainland, they all have to exchange their PR or RO passports with another kind of travel documents that do not identify the place where the passport holders are from as a country.

The mainland and Taiwan are all of China though under different administrations. This is the status quo both sides do not want to change fundamentally for the time being and in the foreseable future. We do not need to go “West and East Germany” before we unite under one flag again.

To all here:

To make myself really well understood and leave no ambiguity that makes me false enemies of others, I would like to summarize my ideas in this comment:

1. I support a unified China in the best interests of the Chinese people, not those of Beijing.

2. Does Huolong support Beijing? Yes and no. I support its policies I deem as beneficial to the Chinese people and I oppose its policies I deem otherwise.

3. I believe Taiwan’s democracy is a good thing for the rest of China. I have no problem identifying Democracy as a better way of running China. Again, we do not need another revolution to achieve it.

4. Liberty, freedom of speech, and democracy. I have no difficulty thinking them as good. (Again, I don’t think Chinese versions of the three we will enjoy have to fit western ideals. They are not for the purposes of their own. Instead, they should be part of a bigger picture in which China gets better socially, economically, and politically. )

Do not make me your false enemy and do not argue with me what I already agree with you.