Proposed Guidelines for Taiwan’s National Unification Council

A guest post from Jerome Keating.

Inane Flap Over an Outdated and Inept National Unification Council

Some called it a bombshell but it was only the bursting of a bubble. Taiwan’s President Chen Shui-bian has recently caused quite a stir among the biased and uninformed by proposing to abolish the country’s ineffective National Unification Council (NUC). The continued flap over the NUC and its guidelines highlights that most people know nothing about this outdated and ineffective organization, how the guidelines themselves contradict reality, and how the council comes from an era when the Kuomintang (KMT) wished to substitute its personal agenda for that of the people of Taiwan.

Formed back in 1990 (six years before Taiwan’s people were allowed to directly elect their President) the NUC represents a last ditch effort by the KMT to explain and justify its continued forty plus years of martial law and one-party state rule i.e. their alleged purpose all along was democracy. The council adopted the present guidelines at its third meeting on February 23, 1991.

First examine this; the Pan-blue dominated Legislature in typical hypocritical fashion cries at how President Chen does not have the best interests of the people in mind. That same Pan-blue Legislature had just cut the annual budget of the NUC to a mere US thirty-two dollars—barely enough to pay to install a phone or get fax paper for less than a month. This is more than a slap in the face to the NUC, it confirms that even the Pan-blues consider the NUC useless but it further insults the people of Taiwan.

The same Pan-blue Legislature has similarly rendered the Control Yuan (one of the five major agencies of the government) ineffective for over a year by not acting on approving its members and by not giving a justifiable explanation. These actions do not have the best interests of the people in mind. They smack of a Legislative Yuan attempting to hi-jack the government and doing anything to insult its president by paralyzing the country.

The NUC issue involves democracy and the mis-interpreted nomenclature of independence. As I had stated in earlier writings, if the people are for a democracy and have a democracy, they already are independent.

Taiwan has that democracy and that independence. To unify with a country of its choice is certainly one of its options. Another option is that it remain free and independent. When a political party insists that unification is the only option as does the KMT and the other Pan-blue parties, they deny Taiwan its democracy.

While the Pan-blues are trying to hi-jack Taiwan for their ends, the goal of the NUC ironically was to establish a democratic, free, and equitably prosperous China. This is a noble goal for China of which the KMT are waishengren on Taiwan, but it rests on a false and unproved premise stated in the guidelines, “Unification . . . is the common wish of Chinese people at home and abroad.” The Taiwanese people were never consulted or even given a vote in the formulation of this premise.

Besides the false premise of the guidelines, there is much more illustrating why they should be scrapped. The terms of the process for unification stated in the guidelines have been continually violated by the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

A few examples suffice. Both sides of the Taiwan Strait should “establish a mutually benign relationship by not endangering each other’s security and stability.” “Democracy and the rule of law” should be present in both the PRC and the KMT. “Both sides of the Strait should work together and assist each other in taking part in international organizations and activities.” With over 700 missiles pointed at Taiwan, a total lack of democracy in the PRC, and the PRC’s continued efforts to keep Taiwan from participating in the WHO, ASEAN, the UN etc. there should be no doubt in anyone’s mind that the NUC is a one-sided dream fostered by the KMT. It is a dream that is totally disassociated from the reality of life on the Taiwan Strait and a dream which serves only to fog over the reality of how the KMT reluctantly relinquished its martial law and one-party state.

Adding to the flames of hypocrisy stemming from the period of the 1991 formulation of the NUC, KMT Legislator Su Chi then chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council under the KMT has just admitted that he deceived the public. In 1992 he stated that there was a “consensus on one China.” This deception, formulated by him and perpetuated by the KMT has for the past decade and more been used to deceive not only the people of Taiwan but also the USA.

Despite all this, Chairman Ma of the KMT in typical doublespeak states that there is a “symbolic meaning” in the NUC which links to the KMT’s avowed goal of unification. Ma further feels that Chen’s act of abolishing the NUC instead of trying to set the record straight would do harm to Taiwan-US and Taiwan-China relations. How facing the truth of the past does harm to mis-represented present relations is something Ma seems to specialize in. As for its symbolic meaning, Ma is clearly stating “You were duped, learn to enjoy it.”

(This topic is also being vigorously discussed in the Duck Pond.)

The Discussion: 9 Comments

So why did CSB have to do it? Doesn’t he have anything better to come up with?

Most people have moved past the point its been defunct – why did he have to demonstrate his incompetence (again) by intentionally trying to get a rise out of Beijing and Washington?

You keep referring to the pan-blues trying to “hi-jack” Taiwan through the LY and insinuate anyone blue is somehow not Taiwanese. Did you forget they were voted in by the people of Taiwan through the *democratic* process? Or is this somehow not significant?

February 28, 2006 @ 10:10 pm | Comment

As usual, solid, thoughtful, and well-argued stuff from Jerome.

While we await for the inevitable howls of disapproval and offensive nationalist rubbish from the usual suspects, let’s remind ourselves that those who are suddenly thrown into a state of red-faced, vein-popping outrage at the scrapping of an irrelevant and defunct body which came to being as as a result of utterly bankcrupt-KMT political manoevering during the dictatorship period many years ago, almost certainly didn’t even know of it’s bloody existence before this week and would be hard pushed, even now, to articulate any other argument other than the intenesely boring and devestatingly predictable and crude utterances of the Chinese government and strictly-controlled state mouthpieces such as “Chen Shui Bian will bring disaster to Taiwan” and “Taiwanese independence will never be tolerated”.

I’ve have never heard so much inexplicable stupidity and absolute imbecility uttered so quickly as when a Mainland Chinese person talks about Taiwan.

I usually don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

February 28, 2006 @ 11:00 pm | Comment

Much like the Palestinians in Hamas (I hope), the Taiwanese were voting AGAINST the DPP’s tremendous corruption more so than they were FOR loving a belligerent communist dictatorship neighbor.

Then again, South Korea has no problem with such love (sadly, both to NK AND China).

February 28, 2006 @ 11:00 pm | Comment

Glad I got that off my chest.

February 28, 2006 @ 11:02 pm | Comment

To Chairman Yao,

Why did CSB do it? Of course he has political motives. But you ask why does he try to get a rise out of Beijing and Washington, the answer is simple; your own words condemn them.
He does it because he does get a rise out of them.
You say that everyone has moved past that point; Beijing and Washington have not (at least not openly and on record).
They still operate from an outdated nomenclature and positions.

On the blues, I never have tarred all of them with the same brush; but if you look at the 100 year plus history of the KMT it is as I have always maintained a perfect example of what happens when good men are silent.
As for the legislature; I have spoken on this in the past; it is skewed by the past voting system which most are not conscious of.

February 28, 2006 @ 11:05 pm | Comment

Chen can be added to the illustrious list of liberals blasted as crazy extremists bound to start a war in their day who ultimately had the last laugh by sticking unwaveringly to their guns (moral guns or otherwise)…

-America’s Founding Fathers
-Reagan (with a good bit of help from Thatcher and Gorby)
And perhaps now:
-Chen Shui-bian

As the old Apple “Think Different” commercials used to say, “the ones who are crazy enough to think they can change the world…are the ones who do.”

Only History knows for sure

February 28, 2006 @ 11:39 pm | Comment

By the way, Benny, it fascinating on how you packed all those comments and ideas into one continuous sentence. You must have had a past where you read Faulkner or such.

February 28, 2006 @ 11:46 pm | Comment

-Reagan (with a good bit of help from Thatcher and Gorby)

hmm…i’ve never heard anyone call Reagan a “liberal” before.
and yes, MacArthur was seen as an extremist who wanted to start a war, perhaps a nuclear one, for that matter, and who was fired for it…(so much for having the last laugh.)

I presume G.W. Bush should be added to this “illustrious” list with CSB, for sticking to his guns?

March 1, 2006 @ 3:56 am | Comment

“This is a noble goal for China of which the KMT are waishengren on Taiwan”

“Ma Ying-jeou Finally Admits the KMT Are Waishengren”

I really don’t get what this obsession with “waishengren” and “benshengren” is about? Is there anything, genetically or philosophically, that bars “waishengren” from being legitimate on Taiwan?

It’s like saying every American Jew who supports Israel is a crazy zionist,
or Pro-China Asian Americans are PRC spys (remember Wen Ho Lee)?

Try that in the US, and see how it goes.

March 1, 2006 @ 4:11 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.