Why Bring Up a Dead Issue?

Why Bring Up a Dead Issue?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 6, 2009

Masaki Saito, Japan's representative to Taipei, declared that "Taiwan's status is still undetermined," causing a huge stir. But domestically and internationally, this perspective is long obsolete, and bears no relationship whatsoever to the actual status of the Republic of China.

Domestically, after four presidential elections, and two changes in ruling parties, the Republic of China has fully affirmed its legality and legitimacy. Internationally, the Ma administration's adherence to the 1992 Consensus and "One China, Different Interpretations" has allowed the two sides to avoid denying each other's legitimacy. Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory is hardly something that needs to be brought up again.

That being the case, why has Japan trotted out the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory now, triggering a major domestic and international controversy?

Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory had its roots in the Treaty of San Francisco. Is had a major impact on the Republic of China over the past five decades, particularly on its political development. According to the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory, even after Washington established diplomatic relations with Beijing, it could still apply domestic law in the form of the Taiwan Relations Act in order to maintain semi-official relations with Taipei. Even after the rise of Mainland China, this allowed Taipei a certain amount of international breathing room.

The most significant impact of the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory however, was in domestic politics. Because if Taiwan's status was undetermined, that implied it could choose independence via a public referendum. As a result, beginning with early 1950's Taiwan independence activist Liao Wen-yi, the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory became the theoretical foundation for the Taiwan independence movement. The Dang Wai (Party Outsider) Central Committee was the predecessor to the Democratic Progressive Party. In 1983 it first set forth its view that "Taiwan's future should be decided collectively by the inhabitants of Taiwan." After the Democratic Progressive Party was founded in 1991, it adopted the Taiwan Independence Party Platform. It advocated using the initiative and referendum process to establish an independent "Republic of Taiwan."

The Democratic Progressive Party heavily promoted the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory. But it was also the Democratic Progressive Party that turned the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory on its head. The turning point was the 1996 Presidential Election. Democratic Progressive Party Chairman Shih Ming-teh, who was in Washington at the time, proclaimed that "If the Democratic Progressive Party assumes office, it has no need to declare Taiwan independence and will not declare Taiwan independence." He proclaimed that as long as Taiwan maintained the status quo, that would be enough to ensure its sovereignty and independence. Shih Ming-teh drifted further and further away as a result of political struggles with the Democratic Progressive Party. Nevertheless, during the 1999 Presidential Election, the Democratic Progressive Party passed its "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." For the first time it formally recognized the "Republic of China" as a nation. At this point, the Democratic Progressive Party effectively abandoned the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory, and recognized the Republic of China.

The key to the Democratic Progressive Party's turnabout was Taiwan's democratization. Following the re-election of every member of the Legislative Yuan and National Assembly, and the direct election of President Lee Teng-hui in 1996, the KMT's rule had been fully legitimized. Allegations that Taiwan's status remained undetermined no longer corresponded to public perception. In 2000, after Chen Shui-bian came to power, he still advocated maintaining the status quo. However, beginning in 2004, as President of the Republic of China Chen Shui-bian actually returned to the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory. He demanded a constitutional referendum and a change in the nation's name.

During his last two years as president, Chen pushed Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory to the limit, with painful consequences.

The first painful consequence was worsening relations with Washington. In order to block Chen Shui-bian's constitutional referendum, Washington changed its policy. In the past it would declare only that it did not support Taiwan independence. By 2004, U.S. State Department officials openly declared that they "agree that Taiwan is part of China." Chen Shui-bian's aggressive promotion of Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory and de jure independence, had the opposite effect on Taiwan's status.

Of course the bloodiest battle in this war was fought on Taiwan. Reunification vs. independence has long been controversial on Taiwan. It is a matter of personal belief. It is hard to talk about right and wrong. Maintaining the status quo is the greatest common denominator. When Chen Shui-bian used the machinery of state to aggressively promote independence, he Intensified controversy over reunification vs. independence. He also provoked tensions between social and ethnic groups. The harm he inflicted will be difficult to remedy any time soon.

The book Chen Shui-bian wrote in prison expressed regrets that he failed to rectify names and author a new constitution. The unspoken truth was that Chen Shui-bian's failure to rectify names and author a new constitution during his term of office was not due to caution on Ah-Bian's part. It was simply impossible given the international situation. American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt visited Taiwan twice in 2008 to prevent Ah-Bian from moving toward Taiwan independence.

In the wake of Ah-Bian's brinksmanship, Ma Ying-jeou came to power. Ma returned to strategic ambiguity. He did not trumpet the sovereignty of the Republic of China. But he aggressively used the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty of 1952 to resolve historical issues surrounding the Taiwan's Undetermined Status Theory.

If we reaffirm the Republic of China, and cross-Strait relations develop harmoniously, the Republic of China government in Taipei may be able to participate in international activities and carry on exchanges with Beijing. By that time Taiwan's status will not longer be undetermined.

中時電子報
中國時報 　2009.05.06
既已時過境遷 何必重提？
本報訊

日本駐台代表齋藤正樹發表「台灣地位未定論」，引發軒然大波，但是，無論是國內外情勢，此一角度皆可說是「時過境遷」，已不能確實的描繪中華民國現狀。

因為，就國內而言，經過四次總統大選、二次政黨輪替，中華民國政府的統治權具充分的合法性及正當性；就對外關係而言，馬政府堅持的九二共識、一中各表主張，至少讓兩岸關係呈現互不否認的狀態，亦無重提「台灣地位未定論」的急迫性。

既然如此，為何此時冒出的台灣地位未定論，仍在國內政壇引發重大爭議？

源生於舊金山和約的「台灣地位未定論」，對中華民國過去五十年來的發展、尤其是政治發展，確實發生了重大的形塑效果，基於台灣地位未定論，美國即使和中國建交之後，仍以國內法形式的「台灣關係法」，和台灣維持半官方關係，台灣也得以在中國興起之後，仍維持有限的國際空間。

台灣地位未定論真正重大的影響，則在國內政治。由於地位未定論隱涵台灣可以透過住民自決、來選擇台灣獨立，因此，從一九五○年代早期的台獨運動人士廖文毅開始，台灣地位未定就成為台獨運動最重要的理論基礎，影響所及，一九八三年民進黨前身的「黨外中央後援會」，就首度推出「台灣前途，應由台灣全體住民共同決定」的政見。民進黨成立後在一九九一年通過的「台獨黨綱」，更是倡議以公民投票方式，建立獨立自主的台灣共和國。

值得注意的是，民進黨將台灣地位未定論發揚光大，但也是民進黨，將台灣地位未定論整個翻轉，轉折點在一九九六年的總統大選，當時的民進黨黨主席施明德在華府宣布「民進黨如果執政，不必也不會宣布台灣獨立」，他認為台灣只要維持現狀，即可確保主權獨立，施明德雖因民進黨政治鬥爭，而與該黨漸行漸遠，但是，一九九九年為了總統大選，民進黨舉黨在全代會通過「台灣前途決議文」，首次在正式文件中承認「中華民國」國號。至此，民進黨已形同拋棄「台灣地位未定論」，承認中華民國現狀。

民進黨這段轉折的真正關鍵，在於台灣的民主化，經過國會全面改選、一九九六年總統直選選出李登輝後，當時執政的國民黨已取得充分的合法性，再持台灣地位未定主張，和民眾的感受相當背離。二千年陳水扁上台後仍持維持現狀主張，但是二○○四年開始，已經身為中華民國總統的陳水扁，竟然重返未定論，堅持要以公投來推動制憲及國號正名。

扁在總統最後兩年，更將台灣地位未定論推到極致，但也造成極為慘痛的後果。

首當其衝的是對美關係，為了防堵陳水扁的制憲公投，美國政府一改過去公開僅表示不支持台獨的慣例，到了二○○四年，美國國務院官員更公開說出「同意台灣是中國的一部分」，可以說，陳水扁基於台灣地位未定論而積極推動的法理台獨，反而讓台灣地位遭受重挫。

當然，這一場戰爭最慘烈的戰場還是在台灣，尤其，台灣本來就有統獨爭議，這是個人信仰問題，難言對錯，「維持現狀」是雙方最大的交集，當陳水扁以國家機器強力推動極獨時，激化了統獨爭議，也挑起族群間的緊張關係，其造成的傷害，短期內難以彌補。

陳水扁的獄中家書悔恨的說，當時應落實正名制憲的主張，他沒有說出的實情是，陳水扁任內之所以沒有宣布正名制憲，並非扁的慎重，而是國際情勢不允許，美國在台協會主席薄瑞光，就曾於二○○八年兩次赴台阻擋扁的極獨路線。

在扁極端的「實驗」之後，馬英九上台，又重回戰略模糊的老路，他雖不強調中華民國的主權地位，但是積極的以一九五二年的中日和約來解決台灣地位未定的歷史問題。

長期而言，如果在台灣回歸中國民國之後，能在兩岸關係和諧發展的情勢下，順利的以中華民國身分參與國際社會、與對岸進行交流，那時，台灣也許就有機會真正擺脫地位未定的陰影。