Foreword
On October 1, 1949, the
Chinese people won a great victory in the new
democratic revolution and founded the People's Republic of
China (PRC). The Kuomintang (KMT) ruling clique retreated
from the mainland to entrench in China's Taiwan Province in
confrontation with the Central Government with the support
of foreign forces. This is the origin of the Taiwan issue.
Settlement of the Taiwan issue and realization of the
complete reunification of China embody the fundamental
interests of the Chinese nation. The Chinese government has
worked persistently toward this goal in the past 50 years.
From 1979, the Chinese government has striven for the
peaceful reunification of China in the form of "one
country, two systems" with the greatest sincerity and
the utmost effort. Economic and cultural exchanges and
people-to-people contacts between the two sides of the
Taiwan Straits have made rapid progress since the end of
1987. Unfortunately, from the 1990s, Lee Teng-hui, the
leader of the Taiwan authorities, has progressively betrayed
the One-China Principle, striving to promote a separatist
policy with "two Chinas" at the core, going
so far as to openly describe the cross-Straits
relations as "state to state relations, or at least
special state to state relations."This action has
seriously damaged the basis for peaceful reunification of
the two sides, harmed the fundamental interests of the
entire Chinese nation including the Taiwan compatriots, and
jeopardized peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.
The Chinese government has consistently adhered to
the One-China Principle and resolutely opposed any
attempt to separate Taiwan from China. The
struggle between the Chinese government and the
separatist forces headed by Lee Teng-hui finds its
concentrated expression in the question of whether
to persevere in the One-China Principle or to create
"two Chinas" or "One-China, one
Taiwan."
In August 1993, we
issued a white paper entitled "The Taiwan Question and
Reunification of China," which systematically expounds
the fact concerning Taiwan as an inalienable part of China,
the origin of the Taiwan issue and the Chinese government's
basic principles and related policies regarding resolution
of the Taiwan question. We deem it necessary here to further
explain to the international community the Chinese
government's position and policy on the One-China
Principle.
I. The Basis for One China, de Facto
and de Jure
The One-China Principle has been
evolved in the course of the Chinese people's just struggle
to safeguard China's sovereignty and territorial integrity,
and its basis, both de facto and de jure, is
unshakable.
Taiwan is an inalienable part of
China. All the facts and laws about Taiwan prove that Taiwan
is an inalienable part of Chinese territory. In April 1895,
through a war of aggression against China, Japan forced the
Qing government to sign the unequal Treaty of Shimonoseki,
and forcibly occupied Taiwan. In July 1937, Japan launched
an all-out war of aggression against China. In December
1941, the Chinese government issued the Proclamation of
China's Declaration of War Against Japan, announcing to the
world that all treaties, agreements and contracts concerning
Sino-Japanese relations, including the Treaty of
Shimonoseki, had been abrogated, and that China would
recover Taiwan. In December 1943, the Cairo Declaration was
issued by the Chinese, U.S. and British
governments, stipulating that Japan should return
to China all the territories it had stolen from the Chinese,
including Northeast China, Taiwan and the Penghu
Archipelago. The Potsdam Proclamation signed by China, the
United States and Britain in 1945 (later adhered to by the
Soviet Union) stipulated that "The terms of the Cairo
Declaration shall be carried out." In August of that
year, Japan declared surrender and promised in its
instrument of surrender that it would faithfully fulfill the
obligations laid down in the Potsdam Proclamation.
On October 25, 1945, the Chinese government recovered Taiwan
and the Penghu Archipelago, resuming the exercise of
sovereignty over Taiwan.
On October 1, 1949,
the Central People's Government of the PRC was proclaimed,
replacing the government of the Republic of China to become
the only legal government of the whole of China and its sole
legal representative in the international arena, thereby
bringing the historical status of the Republic of China to
an end. This is a replacement of the old regime by a new one
in a situation where the main bodies of the same
international laws have not changed and China's sovereignty
and inherent territory have not changed therefrom, and so
the government of the PRC naturally should fully
enjoy and exercise China's sovereignty, including its
sovereignty over Taiwan.
Since the KMT ruling
clique retreated to Taiwan, although its regime has
continued to use the designations "Republic of
China" and "government of the Republic of
China," it has long since completely forfeited its
right to exercise state sovereignty on behalf of China and,
in reality, has always remained only a local authority in
Chinese territory.
The formulation of the
One-China Principle and its basic meaning. On the day of its
founding, the Central People's Government of the PRC
declared to governments of all countries in the world,
"This government is the sole legitimate government
representing the entire people of the People's Republic of
China. It is ready to establish diplomatic relations with
all foreign governments that are willing to abide by the
principles of equality, mutual benefit and mutual respect
for each other's territorial integrity and
sovereignty." Shortly afterwards, the Central People's
Government telegraphed the United Nations, announcing that
the KMT authorities had "lost all basis, both de jure
and de facto, to represent the Chinese people," and
therefore had no right to represent China at all. One
principle governing New China's establishment of diplomatic
relations with a foreign country is that it recognizes the
government of the PRC as the sole legitimate government
representing the whole of China, severs or refrains from
establishing diplomatic relations with the Taiwan
authorities.
These propositions of the Chinese
government met with obstruction by the U.S. government. On
January 5, 1950, the U.S. President Truman issued a
statement, saying that the U.S. and other Allied countries
recognized China's exercise of sovereignty over Taiwan
Island in the four years since 1945. However, after the
start of the Korean War in June 1950, to isolate and contain
China the U.S. government not only sent troops to occupy
Taiwan, but it also dished out such fallacies as "the
status of Taiwan has yet to be determined" and later,
step by step, lobbied for "dual recognition" among
the international community in order to create "two
Chinas." Naturally, the Chinese government resolutely
opposed this, insisting that there is only one China in the
world, Taiwan is a part of China and the government of the
PRC is the sole legal government representing the whole of
China. China has evolved the One-China Principle precisely
in the course of the endeavor to develop normal diplomatic
relations with other countries and the struggle to safeguard
state sovereignty and territorial integrity. The above
propositions constitute the basic meaning of the One-China
Principle, the crucial point being to safeguard China's
sovereignty and territorial integrity.
During
the 30 or 40 years after 1949, although the Taiwan
authorities did not recognize the legitimate status of the
government of the PRC as the representative of the whole of
China, they did insist that Taiwan is a part of China and
that there is only one China, and opposed "two
Chinas" and "Taiwan independence. " This
shows that for a long time there has been a common
understanding among the Chinese on both sides of
the Taiwan Straits on the fundamental question
that there is only one China and Taiwan is a part
of Chinese territory. As far back as October 1958,
when the People's Liberation Army (PLA) was engaged in the
battle to bombard Jinmen, Chairman Mao Zedong declared to
the Taiwan authorities, "There is only one China, not
two, in the world. You agree with us on this point, as
indicated in your leaders' proclamations." In January
1979, the Standing Committee of the National People's
Congress (NPC) issued a Message to Taiwan Compatriots,
pointing out that "the Taiwan authorities have always
stood firm on the one China position and opposed the
independence of Taiwan. This is our common stand
and our basis for cooperation."
The
Chinese government's solemn and reasonable stand for the
One-China Principle has gained the understanding and support
of more and more countries and international organizations,
and the One-China Principle has been gradually accepted by
the international community at large. In October 1971, the
United Nations General Assembly adopted at its 26th session
Resolution 2758, which expelled the representatives of the
Taiwan authorities and restored the seat and all the lawful
rights of the government of the PRC in the United Nations.
In September 1972, China and Japan signed a Joint
Statement, announcing establishment of diplomatic relations
between the two countries, and that Japan recognizes the
government of the PRC as the only legitimate government of
China, fully understands and respects the Chinese
government's position that Taiwan is an
inalienable part of the territory of the PRC, and promises
to adhere to the position as prescribed in Article 8 of the
Potsdam Proclamation. In December 1978, China and the U.S.
issued the Joint Communique on the establishment of
diplomatic relations, in which the U.S. " recognizes
the government of the People's Republic of China as the sole
legal government of China" and "acknowledges the
Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is a
part of China. " Up to now, 161 countries have
established diplomatic relations with the PRC; they all
acknowledge the One-China Principle and promise to handle
their relations with Taiwan within the one-China
framework.
II. The One-China Principle--the
Basis and Prerequisite for Achieving Peaceful
Reunification
The One-China Principle is the
foundation stone for the Chinese government's policy on
Taiwan. On Comrade Deng Xiaoping's initiative, the Chinese
government has, since 1979, adopted the policy of peaceful
reunification and gradually evolved the scientific concept
of "one country, two systems." On this basis,
China established the basic principle of "peaceful
reunification, and one country, two systems." The key
points of this basic principle and the relevant policies
are: China will do its best to achieve peaceful
reunification, but will not commit itself to ruling out the
use of force; will actively promote people-to-people
contacts and economic and cultural exchanges between the two
sides of the Taiwan Straits, and start direct trade, postal,
air and shipping services as soon as possible;
achieve reunification through peaceful negotiations and, on
the premise of the One-China Principle, any matter can be
negotiated. After reunification, the policy of "one
country, two systems" will be practiced, with the main
body of China (Chinese mainland) continuing with its
socialist system, and Taiwan maintaining its
capitalist system for a long period of time to come. After
reunification, Taiwan will enjoy a high degree of autonomy,
and the Central Government will not send troops or
administrative personnel to be stationed in
Taiwan. Resolution of the Taiwan issue is an
internal affair of China, which should be achieved by the
Chinese themselves, and there is no call for aid by foreign
forces. The afore-mentioned principles and policies embody
the basic stand and spirit of adhering to the
One-China Principle, and fully respect Taiwan compatriots'
wish to govern and administer Taiwan by themselves. On
January 30, 1995, President Jiang Zemin put forward eight
propositions on the development of relations between the two
sides of the Taiwan Straits and the promotion of peaceful
reunification of China, explicitly pointing out:
"Adhering to the One-China Principle is the basis and
prerequisite for peaceful reunification.
"
Only by adhering to the One-China
Principle can peaceful reunification be achieved. The Taiwan
issue is one left over by the Chinese civil war. As yet, the
state of hostility between the two sides of the Straits has
not formally ended. To safeguard China's sovereignty and
territorial integrity and realize the reunification of the
two sides of the Straits, the Chinese government has the
right to resort to any necessary means. Peaceful
means would be favorable to the common development of the
societies on both sides of the Straits, and to the harmony
and unity of the compatriots across the Straits.
Peaceful means is therefore the best means. The Chinese
government's declaration in 1979 on implementing the
principle of peaceful reunification was based on the premise
that the Taiwan authorities at that time upheld the
principle that there is only one China in the world and
Taiwan is a part of China. Meanwhile, the Chinese government
took into account the fact that the U.S. government, which
for many years had supported the Taiwan authorities, had
accepted that there is only one China in the world, Taiwan
is a part of China and the government of the PRC is the only
legitimate government of China, and saw this acknowledgment
as being beneficial to the peaceful resolution of the Taiwan
issue. While carrying out the policy of peaceful
reunification, the Chinese government always makes it clear
that the means used to solve the Taiwan issue is a matter of
China's internal affairs, and China is under no obligation
to commit itself to rule out the use of force. This is by no
means directed against Taiwan compatriots, but against the
scheme to create an "independent Taiwan" and
against the foreign forces interfering in the reunification
of China, and is intended as a necessary safeguard for the
striving for peaceful reunification. Resort to force would
only be the last choice made under compelling
circumstances.
As for Taiwan, upholding the
principle of one China indicates that it acknowledges that
China's sovereignty and territory are inalienable. In this
way, both sides of the Taiwan Straits will have a common
basis and premise and may find ways to solve their
political differences and realize peaceful
reunification through consultation on an equal footing. If
Taiwan denies the One-China Principle and tries to separate
Taiwan from the territory of China, the premise and basis
for peaceful reunification will cease to exist.
As for the United States, if it promises to
follow a one-China policy, it should earnestly implement the
three communiques between the Chinese and U.S. governments
and fulfill the series of promises it has made. It should
maintain only cultural, commercial and other
non-governmental relations with Taiwan; oppose "Taiwan
independence," "two Chinas" or
"one China, one Taiwan" and not to stand in the
way of the reunification of China. Acting otherwise will
destroy the external conditions necessary for the Chinese
government to strive for peaceful
reunification.
As for countries in the
Asia-Pacific region and other regions in the world, the
situation across the Taiwan Straits has always been closely
linked with the stability of the Asia-Pacific region.
Adherence to the policy of one China by countries concerned
will be beneficial to peace and stability in the
Asia-Pacific region and favorable for China to develop
friendly relations with other countries, and therefore
conforms to the interests of the Asia-Pacific region and
other countries in the world.
The Chinese
government is actively and sincerely striving for peaceful
reunification. To achieve peaceful reunification, the
Chinese government has appealed time and again for
cross-Straits negotiations on the basis of equality and the
One-China Principle. Taking Taiwan's political reality into
full account and out of consideration for the
Taiwan authorities' request for the negotiations to be held
on an equal footing, we have put forward one proposal after
another, such as that the negotiations should be held
between the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Chinese
KMT on a reciprocal basis and that the talks between the two
parties may include representatives from all parties and
mass organizations of Taiwan, and we have never spoken of
negotiations between the "central and local
authorities." The Chinese government has also proposed
that dialogues may start first, including political
dialogues, which may gradually move on to
procedural consultations for political talks to
solve the name, the topics for discussion and the forms of
official talks before political talks are held. Political
talks may be carried out step by step. First, negotiations
should be held and an agreement reached on an official end
to the state of hostility between the two sides under the
principle of one China so as to jointly safeguard China's
sovereignty and territorial integrity and work out
plans for the development of the future cross-Straits
relations. In January 1998, to seek and expand the political
basis for relations between the two sides, the Chinese
government explicitly proposed to the Taiwan side that
before the realization of reunification and in handling
affairs concerning inter-Straits relations, especially
during the talks between the two sides, the One-China
Principle should be upheld, namely that there is only one
China in the world, Taiwan is a part of China and China's
sovereignty and territorial integrity is not to be
separated. The Chinese government hopes that on the basis of
the One-China Principle, the two sides will hold
consultations on an equal footing and discuss national
reunification together.
To strive for peaceful
reunification, the Chinese government has adopted a series
of positive policies and measures to promote the
comprehensive development of cross-Straits relations. From
the end of 1987, when the state of isolation between the two
sides was terminated, to the end of 1999, the number of
Taiwan compatriots coming to the mainland of China for
visiting their relatives, sightseeing or exchanges reached
16 million by turnstile count. The total indirect trade
volume between the two sides of the Straits has
exceeded US$ 160 billion; the agreed capital to be invested
by Taiwan business people in the mainland has exceeded US$
44 billion, of which US$ 24 billion has been actually used.
Great progress has been made in the exchange of mail and
telecommunications across the Straits; and some progress has
been made in the exchange of air and shipping services too.
The NPC and its Standing Committee, the State Council, and
local governments have worked out a sequence of laws and
regulations to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests
of Taiwan compatriots. To properly solve the
concrete issues arising from the people-to-people contacts
between the two sides through consultations, in November
1992 the mainland's Association for Relations Across the
Taiwan Straits and Taiwan's Straits Exchange Foundation
reached the common understanding during talks on
routine affairs that each of the two organizations should
express verbally that "both sides of the Taiwan Straits
adhere to the One-China Principle." On this basis, the
leaders of these two organizations successfully held the
"Wang Daohan-Koo Chen-fu talks" and signed several
agreements on protecting the legitimate rights and
interests of the compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan
Straits in April 1993. In October 1998, the leaders of the
two organizations met in Shanghai, starting political
dialogue across the Straits. The talks between the two
organizations were carried out on an equal footing. Practice
has proved that on the basis of the One-China Principle, it
is entirely possible to find a proper way for holding talks,
based on equality, between the two sides. Since Hong Kong
and Macao's return to China, people-to-people contacts and
exchanges between Hong Kong and Taiwan and between Macao and
Taiwan have continued and developed on the basis of the
One-China Principle.
III. The Chinese
Government--Staunch Champion for the One-China
Principle
Separatist forces in Taiwan are bent
on violating the One-China Principle. In 1988, after Lee
Teng-hui became the leader of the Taiwan authorities, he
publicly stated time and again that the basic policy of the
Taiwan authorities was that "there is only one China,
not two," and "we have always maintained that
China should be reunited, and we adhere to the principle of
'one China.' However, since the
early 1990s, Lee Teng-hui has gradually deviated from the
One-China Principle, trumpeting "two governments,"
"two reciprocal political entities," "Taiwan
is already a state with independent sovereignty," and
"At the present stage the Republic of China is on
Taiwan and the People's Republic of China is on the
mainland." Moreover, he went back on his words, saying
that "I have never said that there is only one
China." In addition, he has connived at and provided
support for the separatists who advocate "Taiwan
independence" and their activities, thus helping the
rapid development of the "Taiwan independence"
forces and the spread of the "Taiwan independence"
ideology. Under the direction of Lee Teng-hui, the Taiwan
authorities have adopted a series of measures toward actual
separation. In matters of Taiwan's form of government, the
Taiwan authorities are seeking to transform Taiwan into an
"independent political entity" through a
"constitutional reform," so as to suit the needs
of creating "two Chinas." In foreign relations,
the Taiwan authorities have spared no effort to
carry out the activities for "expanding the
international space of survival," with the aim of
creating "two Chinas." Since 1993, for seven years
running, the Taiwan authorities have maneuvered for
participation in the United Nations. In military affairs,
the Taiwan authorities have bought large quantities of
advanced weapons from foreign countries and sought to join
the Theater Missile Defense system (TMD), in an attempt to
establish a military alliance of a disguised form with the
United States and Japan.
In ideology and
culture, the Taiwan authorities have endeavored to
obliterate the Chinese awareness of Taiwan compatriots,
especially young people, and their identification with the
motherland, in order to create misunderstanding of the
motherland among Taiwan compatriots and estrange them from
her, thus cutting off the ideological and cultural ties
between the compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits.
Since 1999, Lee Teng-hui has stepped up
his separatist activities. In May, he published
the book The Road to Democracy, which advocates the division
of China into seven regions, each enjoying "full
autonomy." On July 9, he went so far as to publicly
distort the cross-Straits relations as "state to state
relations, or at least special state to state
relations," in an attempt to fundamentally change the
status of Taiwan as a part of China, sabotage the
relations between both sides of the Taiwan Straits,
especially the basis for cross-Straits political dialogues
and negotiations, and wreck the foundation for peaceful
reunification. Lee Teng-hui has become the general
representative of Taiwan's separatist forces, a saboteur of
the stability of the Taiwan Straits, a stumbling-block
preventing the development of relations between China and
the United States, and a troublemaker for the peace and
stability of the Asia-Pacific region.
The
Chinese government firmly defends the One-China Principle.
The Chinese government and people have always maintained
sharp vigilance and fought resolutely against the
secessionist activities of the Taiwan separatists,
represented by Lee Teng-hui.
After Lee
Teng-hui's "private" visit to the United States in
June 1995, the Chinese government has waged a resolute
struggle against separation and against "Taiwan
independence," and made strong protests and
representations to the U.S. government for openly
allowing Lee Teng-hui to visit the U.S., violating its
promises made in the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, and
seriously prejudicing China's sovereignty. This struggle has
shown the Chinese government and people's firm resolve and
ability to safeguard state sovereignty and territorial
integrity, and exerted an important and far-reaching
influence. Compatriots in Taiwan have further realized the
serious harm "Taiwan independence" can cause. Lee
Teng-hui has received a heavy blow for his separatist
activities in the international community, so that some of
the " Taiwan independence" protagonists have had
to abandon certain extremist propositions aimed at division.
The international community has further realized the
necessity of upholding the one-China policy. The U.S.
government has explicitly undertaken not to support
"Taiwan independence," not to support "two
Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan," and not
to support Taiwan joining any international organization
whose membership is restricted to sovereign states.
The Chinese government and people have fought
more unremittingly after Lee Teng-hui cooked up his
"two states" theory. The relevant department of
the Chinese government has clearly stated that the attempt
of the Taiwan separatists to implement the "two
states" theory in "legal" form was an even
more serious and dangerous step toward division and a grave
provocation against peaceful reunification. Were the attempt
to succeed, it would be impossible for China to achieve
peaceful reunification. The struggle against this attempt
has grown in momentum with Chinese both at home and abroad
condemning the "two states" theory with one voice.
Most countries in the world have reaffirmed their position
of upholding the One-China Policy. The U.S. government has
also reasserted its adherence to the One-China Policy and
its commitment to the "Three Non-supports" for
Taiwan. Finally, the Taiwan authorities have been compelled
to announce that they will not amend their
"constitution" and "laws" according to
the "two states" theory.
Nevertheless, separatists in Taiwan are still
attempting to detach Taiwan "de jure" from China
in the name of the "Republic of China" by various
forms, including "formulating a new constitution,"
"amending the constitution," and "explaining
the constitution" or through "legislation."
Special vigilance should be maintained to the fact that the
Taiwan separatists are continually scheming to disrupt the
Sino-U.S. relations and provoke conflicts and confrontation
between the two nations to achieve their aim of
dividing China.
Facts prove that a
serious crisis still exists in the situation of the Taiwan
Straits. To safeguard the interests of the entire Chinese
people including compatriots in Taiwan and maintain the
peace and development of the Asia-Pacific region, the
Chinese government remains firm in adhering to
"peaceful reunification" and "one country,
two systems"; upholding the eight propositions put
forward by President Jiang Zemin for the development of
cross-Straits relations and the acceleration of the peaceful
reunification of China; and doing its utmost to achieve the
objective of peaceful reunification. However, if a grave
turn of events occurs leading to the separation of Taiwan
from China in any name, or if Taiwan is invaded and occupied
by foreign countries, or if the Taiwan authorities refuse,
sine die, the peaceful settlement of cross-Straits
reunification through negotiations, then the Chinese
government will only be forced to adopt all drastic measures
possible, including the use of force, to safeguard China's
sovereignty and territorial integrity and fulfill the great
cause of reunification. The Chinese government and people
absolutely have the determination and ability to safeguard
China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and will
never tolerate, condone or remain indifferent to the
realization of any scheme to divide China. Any such scheme
is doomed to failure.
IV. Several Questions
Involving the One-China Principle in the Cross-Straits
Relations
Chinese territory and sovereignty has
not been split, and the two sides of the Straits are not two
states. The Taiwan authorities support their
position on "two Chinas," including the "two
states" theory proposed by Lee Teng-hui, with the
following arguments:
Since 1949, the
territories on either side of the Straits have been divided
and governed separately, with neither side having
jurisdiction over the other; the government of the PRC has
never ruled Taiwan; and since 1991 Taiwan has witnessed a
form of government that has nothing to do with
that of the Chinese mainland. These arguments are absolutely
untenable, and can never lead to the conclusion
that Taiwan may declare itself a state under the name of the
"Republic of China," or that the two sides of the
Straits have been divided into two states.
Firstly, state sovereignty is inseparable. The territory is
the space in which a state exercises its
sovereignty. In the territory of a country there can only be
a central government exercising sovereignty on behalf of the
state. As we have already said, Taiwan is an
inalienable part of Chinese territory and, after replacing
the government of the Republic of China in 1949,
the government of the PRC has become the sole legal
government of China, enjoying and exercising sovereignty
over the whole of China, including Taiwan.
Although the two sides of the Straits remain
to be reunified, the long-term existence of this abnormal
situation has not imbued Taiwan with a status and rights in
international law, nor can it change the legal status of
Taiwan as a part of China. The problem now is that the
separatists in Taiwan and some foreign anti-China forces
seek to change this state of affairs, and it is this that
the Chinese government and people are firmly against.
We firmly oppose changing Taiwan's status as a
part of China by referendum. The Taiwan separatists' attempt
to change Taiwan's status as a part of China by referendum
on the pretext that " sovereignty belongs to the
people" is futile. Firstly, under both domestic and
international laws Taiwan's legal status as a part of
Chinese territory is unequivocal, and there can be no
premise for using referendum to decide any matter of
self-determination. Secondly, the phrase "sovereignty
belongs to the people" refers to all the
people of state, and not certain people or the
people of a certain area. The sovereignty over Taiwan
belongs to all the Chinese people including Taiwan
compatriots, and not to some of the people in Taiwan.
Thirdly, at no time in history has Taiwan been a state in
its own right, and since 1945 Taiwan has not been a foreign
colony, nor has it been under foreign occupation. The issue
of national self-determination, therefore, does not exist.
In short, from the time that China recovered Taiwan in 1945,
there has been no question at all of changing Taiwan's
status as a part of China by holding a referendum.
The only future for Taiwan is reunification with the China
mainland, and certainly not separation. Any attempt to
separate Taiwan from China through so-called referendum
would only lead the Taiwan people to disaster.
The "two German states formula"
cannot be applied to the settlement of the Taiwan issue.
Some people in Taiwan have suggested that cross-Straits
relations should be dealt with according to the "two
German states formula," since Germany was divided into
two states after the Second World War, and was later
reunified. This proposal shows a misunderstanding of history
and reality. The division of Germany after the war and the
temporary division between the two sides of the Straits are
questions of a different nature, the difference lying mainly
in three aspects. The first is the reasons for, and the
nature of, the division. After its defeat in the Second
World War in 1945, Germany was divided into zones
occupied separately by the four victorious nations of the
United States, Britain, France and the Soviet Union
according to a declaration on the defeat of Germany and the
assumption of supreme authority and the subsequent Potsdam
Agreement. The reunification of Germany became a focus of
the confrontation in Europe between the United States and
the Soviet Union during the cold war. The Federal Republic
of Germany and the German Democratic Republic were
established in the zones occupied by the U.S., Britain and
France, and that occupied by the Soviet Union.
Thus Germany was divided into two states. Obviously, the
German question arose entirely from external factors, while
the Taiwan issue, left over by China's civil war, is a
matter of China 's internal affairs. The second aspect is
the difference in status between the two under international
law. Germany was divided according to a series of
international treaties during and after the Second World
War, while the Taiwan question involves provisions of the
Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and other
international treaties, stating that Japan must return
Taiwan, which it had stolen from China, to the Chinese. The
third is the difference between the two in their actual
conditions of existence.
Against the
backdrop of the confrontation between the U.S. and the
Soviet Union, the two German states had foreign troops
stationing in their territories and so were compelled to
recognize each other and co-exist in the international
community. The Chinese government has always persisted in
the principle of one China. Before Lee Teng-hui assumed
power, and during his early days in office, the Taiwan
authorities recognized only one China and opposed "two
Chinas," and the One-China Principle has also been
widely accepted by the international community. For these
reasons, the Taiwan issue and the German issue cannot be
placed in the same category, nor can the "two German
states formula" be copied to settle the Taiwan
question. Any question can be discussed under the
One-China Principle. The Chinese government advocates that
the final purpose of cross-Straits negotiations is to
achieve peaceful reunification; and that to achieve this
purpose, talks should be held based on the principle of one
China. However, the proposals for " Taiwan
independence," "two Chinas" and "two
states," aiming for separation instead of
reunification, violate the One-China Principle, and are
naturally unacceptable to the Chinese government. Provided
that it is within the framework of one China, any question
can be discussed, including the various issues that are of
concern to the Taiwan side. The Chinese government believes
that Taiwan's international space for economic, cultural and
social activities compatible with its status, the political
status of the Taiwan authorities and other questions can be
finally settled in the process of peaceful
reunification through political negotiations within this
framework.
The so-called controversy about
democracy and system is an excuse for obstructing the
reunification of China. In recent years the Taiwan
authorities have repeatedly declared that "
democratization on the China mainland is the key to the
reunification of China" and that "the real essence
of the cross-Straits issue is a contest between
systems." This is an excuse for postponing and
resisting reunification, as well as a scheme to deceive
compatriots in Taiwan and world opinion. The CPC and the
Chinese government have consistently striven to achieve
socialist democracy. To achieve peaceful reunification in
the form of "one country, two systems," and to
allow the two different social systems on both sides of the
Straits to coexist without imposing them on one or the
other--this is best able to embody the wishes of compatriots
on both sides of the Straits and is itself democratic. The
different social systems across the Straits, therefore,
should not constitute any barrier to peaceful reunification.
Moreover, the Chinese government acknowledges the
differences between Taiwan on the one hand and Hong Kong and
Macao on the other and, after peaceful reunification, is
prepared to apply a looser form of the "one country,
two systems" policy in Taiwan than in Hong Kong and
Macao. It is totally unreasonable and undemocratic for the
Taiwan authorities to seek to obstruct reunification on the
pretext of the "controversy about democracy and
system" and to force the more than 1.2 billion people
living on the Chinese mainland to practice the political and
economic systems in Taiwan. The demand for democracy should
not be used as a reason for refusing reunification. The
essence of the difference between the two sides of the
Straits on this question lies by no means in the controversy
over whether to practice democracy or in the controversy
over what system to practice, but rather a controversy over
the choice between reunification and separation.
V. Several Questions Involving Adherence to
the One-China Principle in the International
Community
The Chinese government has expressed
its appreciation to the international community for widely
pursuing a one-China policy. In August 1993, we published
the white paper The Taiwan Question and Reunification of
China. In Chapter V of this document, "Several
Questions Involving Taiwan in International Relations,"
we explained our position and policy on a number of issues,
including relations between Taiwan and countries maintaining
diplomatic ties with China, relations between international
organizations and Taiwan, aviation services between Taiwan
and countries having diplomatic relations with China, and
arms sales to Taiwan by countries having diplomatic
relations with China. Here, we would like to reaffirm our
related position and policy.
Taiwan is
ineligible for membership of the United Nations and other
international organizations whose membership is confined to
sovereign states. The United Nations is an
inter-governmental international organization composed of
sovereign states. After the restoration of the lawful rights
of the PRC in the United Nations, the issue of China's
representation in the UNO was resolved once and for all and
Taiwan's re-entry became totally out of the question. The
Taiwan authorities have asserted that Resolution
2758 of the UN resolved only "the problem of
China's representation," but not "the problem of
Taiwan's representation," and demanded participation in
the UN. We will never permit such a separatist act of
creating "two Chinas' or "one China, one
Taiwan."
All members of the UN should
adhere to the purpose and principles of the Charter of the
United Nations and related UN resolutions, abide by norms
governing international relations, including mutual respect
for sovereignty and territorial integrity and
non-interference in each other's internal affairs, and
never, in any form, support Taiwan's joining the UN or other
international organizations whose membership is confined to
sovereign states.
On the basis of the principle
of one China, the Chinese government has made arrangements
for Taiwan's participation in some inter-governmental
international organizations which accept region membership
in an agreeable and acceptable way according to the nature,
regulations and actual conditions of these international
organizations. As a region of China, Taiwan has participated
in the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) respectively in the names of
" Taipei, China" and "Chinese Taipei."
In September 1992, the chairman of the council of the
predecessor of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), stated that
Taiwan may participate in this organization as "a
separate Taiwan-Penghu-Jinmen-Mazu tariff zone"
(abbreviated as Chinese Taipei) after the PRC's entry to
GATT. The WTO should persist in the principle defined in the
afore-said statement when examining the acceptance of
Taiwan's entry to the organization. This is only an ad hoc
arrangement and cannot constitute a model applicable to
other inter-governmental international organizations or
international gatherings.
No country
maintaining diplomatic relations with China should provide
arms to Taiwan or enter into military alliance of any form
with Taiwan. All countries maintaining diplomatic relations
with China should abide by the principles of mutual respect
for sovereignty and territorial integrity and
non-interference in each other's internal affairs, and
refrain from providing arms to Taiwan or helping Taiwan
produce arms in any form or under any
pretext.
The Taiwan question is the most
crucial and most sensitive issue in the relations between
China and the U.S. The three Sino-U.S. joint
communiques are the basis for the healthy and stable
development of relations between the two countries. For over
twenty years, the U.S. has promised to adhere to a One-China
Policy, which has brought to itself benefits such as the
establishment of diplomatic relations with China, the
development of Sino-U.S. relations and the relative
stability of the Taiwan situation. Regrettably, the U.S. has
repeatedly contravened its solemn undertakings to China made
in the August 17 Communique and continued its sale of
advanced arms and military equipment to Taiwan. Recently,
some people in the U.S. Congress have cooked up the
so-called Taiwan Security Enhancement Act and are attempting
to include Taiwan in the TMD. This is gross interference in
China 's internal affairs and a grave threat to China's
security, obstructing the peaceful reunification of China
and jeopardizing the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific
region and the world at large. The Chinese government is
firmly against such actions.
The Chinese
government adheres to the One-China Principle in dealing
with Taiwan's contacts with the outside world. The Taiwan
authorities have spared no effort to promote "pragmatic
diplomacy" in the international arena and enlarge their
"international space of survival," the essence of
these being to create "two Chinas" or "one
China, one Taiwan." It is only natural that the Chinese
government should firmly oppose these. Meanwhile,
considering the needs of Taiwan's socio-economic development
and the actual benefits of compatriots in Taiwan, the
Chinese government has no objection to Taiwan's
non-governmental economic and cultural contacts with foreign
countries; in fact, on the premise of one China, it has
adopted many flexible measures to make Taiwan's economic,
trade and cultural contacts with foreign countries more
convenient. For example, Taiwan may stay on the
International Olympic Committee in the name of "Chinese
Taipei." As a matter of fact, Taiwan has maintained
extensive economic, trade and cultural relations with many
countries and regions in the world. Every year, a million
Taiwan compatriots go abroad for travel, business or study,
as well as for academic, cultural or sports exchanges, and
Taiwan's annual import and export trade volume has exceeded
the US$200-billion mark. This has demonstrated that adhering
to the One-China Principle has not prevented Taiwan
compatriots from engaging in non-governmental international
exchanges or affected the needs of Taiwan's normal economic,
trade and cultural activities.
The Chinese
government safeguards all the justified and lawful rights
and interests of Taiwan compatriots abroad. The people of
Taiwan are of the same flesh and blood with us. The Chinese
government has always worked for safeguarding their
justified and lawful rights and interests abroad. Chinese
embassies and consulates stationed abroad have always
considered it their duties to strengthen their ties with
Taiwan compatriots, listen to their suggestions and requests
and safeguard their interests, and done everything they can
to help them overcome their difficulties. During the Gulf
War, the Chinese embassy helped Taiwanese labor service
personnel stranded in Kuwait pull out of dangerous places
safely. After the big earthquakes in Osaka and Kobe, Japan,
the Chinese embassy and consulate general there promptly
extended their sympathies to stricken Taiwan compatriots.
When the civil war in Cambodia broke out, the Chinese
embassy lost no time in helping Taiwanese business people
and tourists whose lives and property were seriously
imperiled by the war to move to safe places. All
the above-mentioned facts reflect the Chinese government's
care for Taiwan compatriots. When both sides of the Taiwan
Straits are reunified, Taiwan compatriots will, together
with people of all ethnic groups in the country, have more
possibilities to fully enjoy the dignity and honor of the
PRC in the world.
Conclusion
China
has a long history of 5,000 years. The Chinese people have
lived and multiplied on this land where all ethnic groups
have mixed together, in the course of which they have
evolved powerful cohesiveness, and the values of cherishing
and safeguarding unity. Over the long course of history, the
Chinese nation has witnessed changes of dynasties, transfers
of governments, local separatist regimes, and foreign
invasions, especially the untold invasions and dismemberment
by foreign powers in modern history. However, unity has
always been the main trend in the development of Chinese
history. After every separation, the country was invariably
reunified, only to be followed in its wake by rapid
political, economic, cultural, scientific and technological
development. Our compatriots in Taiwan have a glorious
tradition of patriotism, and have performed brilliant
exploits in the struggles against foreign invasions of
Taiwan. Since the founding of the PRC, the Chinese people
have particularly valued their hard-earned national
independence, firmly upheld state sovereignty and
territorial integrity and struggled unswervingly for
reunification of the motherland. The 5,000-year history and
culture have been implanted deeply in the minds of the
Chinese people, sprouting the strong national consciousness
of the need for national unification.
The
Chinese government hopes that the international community
will follow the principle of one China now and always and
that the U.S. government will earnestly fulfil all the
principles concerning the Taiwan issue in the three
Sino-U.S. joint communiques, and its solemn promise to
uphold the One-China Principle.
As the Chinese
government has successively resumed the exercise of
sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macao, the people of the
whole of China are eager to resolve the Taiwan issue as
early as possible and realize the total reunification of the
country. They cannot allow the resolution of the Taiwan
issue to be postponed indefinitely. We firmly believe that
the total reunification of China will be achieved through
the joint efforts of the entire Chinese people including
compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits and those
living overseas.
-End-
|