My Solution to the Cross-Strait Conflict

[ParkeNYU]

An idealistic three-step proposal:

 

1) The PRC, UK, and Portugal agree to fully transfer the sovereignty of Hong Kong and Macau to The Republic of China in 2047 and 2049 respectively, before which dates they would exist as special administrative regions of The Republic of China, effective immediately (or within a reasonable transitional time frame).

2) The PRC and ROC will agree on a temporary "Two Countries, One Nation" principle, wherein the PRC and ROC function as two fully sovereign states until reunification can take place under terms confidently agreed upon by both sides.

3) The two Chinas will agree to discuss future reunification annually (or another agreed upon frequency) without a timetable for conclusion.

 

Why would the PRC agree to this? Because ultimately, cultural unity is more important for the endurance of a nation than political and economic unity. It would be an investment in the future of China, and would allow the two sides to practice systems of governance, economics, and education that work best for their respective environments, histories, and contexts.

[Shelley]

Idealistic indeed, dream on

[Balthazar]

Why would the PRC agree to grant Taiwan "full sovereignty" when reunification taking place "under terms confidently agreed upon by both sides" may never happen at all? And giving away HK and Macau, where they are fully in control, to a now sovereign ROC?

 

"Because ultimately, cultural unity is more important for the endurance of a nation than political and economic unity. It would be an investment in the future of China, and would allow the two sides to practice systems of governance, economics, and education that work best for their respective environments, histories, and contexts."

 

Perhaps, but it would also be an admission that not only the CCP is fit to rule "Greater China", and most likely be seen as a major act (maybe one of history's greatest) of treason to a large, nationalistically inclined, segment of the population. Basically it would be a complete loss of legitimacy, with the national unification mandate being invalidated. Combine this with a slowdown in economic growth and the Sword of Damocles would be hanging in a thin thread indeed.

 

I don't think there's any chance at all that they would take such risks all for the hope that in the very long run this may be better for China.

[ParkeNYU]

Perhaps, then, the proposal may be revised to stipulate a confederacy. In other words, the PRC and ROC would still be sovereign states, but they would be bound together under a confederacy (something between the systems of the U.K. and the E.U.). There would be a strict agreement that neither side may leave this confederacy, under threat of military force. Thus, this confederacy would represent the "one China" favoured by both the CCP and KMT, while the PRC and ROC would be two 'states' instead of 'systems'.

 

I believe that this is a worthy investment for the PRC to make because the 港澳臺 independence movements are becoming dangerously popular, and must be curbed immediately. The CCP must understand that a sense of culture runs far deeper than temporal political and economic preferences; if one day–heaven forbid–the majority of these people no longer consider themselves 'Chinese' in the ethnonational sense, then the Chinese legacy will never recover (unless through military conquest or widespread reeducation). In my opinion, the worst-case scenario is for all three to become desinicised, ironically taking traditional Chinese culture with them. In such a dreadful scenario, the PRC, with their simplified characters, Hanyu pinyin, and Mandarin-only policy, will be left as the sole representative of the great Chinese nation. A massive trove of traditional Chinese culture will thus be relegated to anachronism at best and obscurity at worst, as 港澳臺 shed their Chinese backgrounds. For example, who will be left to teach BoPoMoFo if Taiwan forces the Minnan language to be standard? What if they switch to romanisation altogether one day? What if English remains an official language of Hong Kong, or Portuguese in Macau? Oh, the horrors...

 

That being said, I understand, sympathise with, and support 港澳臺 in their pursuits of their preferred political and economic systems. However, I cannot and shall never support desinicisation under any circumstances, and will actively crusade against it. In my opinion, such a purge of traditional Chinese culture would be tantamount to cultural genocide, of which all parties involved would be guilty.

[Guest realmayo]

and will actively crusade against it.

How?

[ParkeNYU]

realmayo, I shall use social media and word-of-mouth to raise awareness about the validity of the Republic of China as one of the two legitimate representatives of the Chinese nation. When I teach my friends basic Mandarin, I shall teach only traditional characters and BoPoMoFo, advising them to learn simplified characters only after they've learned the traditional forms. I shall promote pan-Chinese culture and all of the sub-cultures under this umbrella by inviting friends to various cultural events. I shall encourage ethnically Chinese people to actively engage with their local Sinitic dialects/topolects/languages whilst also embracing the standard written language and Mandarin as a lingua franca (an ideal diglossia).

[Balthazar]

Perhaps, then, the proposal may be revised to stipulate a confederacy. In other words, the PRC and ROC would still be sovereign states, but they would be bound together under a confederacy (something between the systems of the U.K. and the E.U.).

 

I think the "still be" is problematic here. Yes, it is true that Taiwan/ROC today in many ways functions as a sovereign state, but there's some important limitations that makes the common "de facto sovereign" description a bit of an oversimplification. I think you're downplaying the symbolic importance of ROC not being recognized as an equal, sovereign state, and I don't see any convincing reason why the PRC should (from a rational, not moral, perspective) give up on what it has gained diplomatically over the half century since the nationalists fled to Taiwan..

 

I don't think either side would be interested in your proposed confederacy. For the PRC it would mean saying both sides are equals, and should have an equal say in the future of Greater China. Wu Bangguo made it pretty clear in 2011 that a federal system was out of the question, and little seems to have change since then. Furthermore, if they were to grant Taiwan an equal position at the table, would it not be likely that Tibetans or Uighurs demand something similar? This seems to me the exact opposite of what the CCP is interested in.

 

For the ROC your proposal would mean a pledge never to leave such a confederacy (how would they square this with the current democratic system?), which I doubt would be popular with today's political climate on the island.

 

I also think you may overestimate the threat posed by the situation in Hong Kong. It may be too early to say for sure, but from where I'm sitting it seems Beijing has (so far) handled this pretty smart, and that if anything has been proved it is the futility of such movements under the current political conditions. Furthermore, I also don't think your cultural heritage is something you easily shed. Hong Kong and Taiwan already have distinctive cultural features, in the words of Ackbar Abbas regarding the former: "It is not true, as some might wish to believe, that if you scratch the surface of a Hong Kong person you will find a Chinese identity waiting to be reborn. The Hong Kong person is now a bird of a different feather, perhaps a kind of Maltese Falcon." But these "Maltese Falcons" are still for the most part nostalgic about China of the past, and I don't think that's likely to change. (Although I could be wrong, and I really don't know too much about the cultural side of this.)

[Shelley]

ParkerNYU re: your post #6. I admire your idea of spreading these things. I also wonder just how many people you feel you need to influence to make a difference? and do think you could?

 

Do you think you stand the proverbial snowballs chance in making a difference?

 

This next question you do not have to answer, I would understand entirely your desire not to share. How old are you?

 

The reason I ask is because this sounds like the idealistic talk of young people aged 16 - 35ish. I would suspect you are about 25. I also am prepared to be completely wrong, there is no certainty about this sort of thing.

 

When I was 20 something I was going to radically change the world, now in my older years I like to think I am wiser.

[ParkeNYU]

I think you're downplaying the symbolic importance of ROC not being recognized as an equal, sovereign state

 

Part of my plan is to grant them that status.

 

From a political and economic standpoint, I agree with you. It is both a political and economic sacrifice to recognise the sovereignty of the ROC, not to mention handing them two of their prized cash cows. It is strictly a cultural investment in order to preserve the unity of the Chinese nation. In other words, I believe that it is preferable for 港澳臺 to consider themselves Chinese under a different government, rather than insisting on identities that do not fall under the pan-Chinese umbrella, which leads me to my next point: of course these regions have individual identities and cultures, but the crucial point is that they are inherently subsets of a larger identity. For example, my American lineage spans nearly 400 years, but I cannot deny my European heritage and culture, nor that American culture is a subset of British culture, which is itself a subset of Greco-Roman Judeo-Christian European culture.

 

As for the Tibetans and Uyghurs, I believe that the PRC should allow them to become independent states, since they are not curators of traditional Chinese culture like 港澳臺 are. As for their large Han populations, perhaps an 'Inner Tibet' and an 'Inner East Turkestan' are necessary (à la Inner Mongolia). That's a different issue though.

 

The confederacy idea was just a 'Plan B' compromise; I would ideally like the ROC to become a fully sovereign nation without being tied down to the PRC.

 

As for Hong Kong's new identity, I believe that it is largely a product of British colonial racism that such an identity even exists. It was a crime for Britain to engage in the Opium trade, it was a crime for Britain and Japan to acquire Chinese land through unequal treaties, and it was a crime to indoctrinate the inhabitants with a foreign culture.

 

So why is culture so important to me? Because 港澳臺 are the last bastions of traditional Chinese culture. After the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward on the mainland, it became quite clear that the Chinese Communist Party not only doesn't care to preserve the old ways, but actively seeks to destroy them. The Chinese Nationalist Party is the final ember of traditional China, but it cannot survive without fuel, which is where Hong Kong and Macau come into play. Had the Nationalists succeeded in maintaining control of the mainland, we wouldn't even be having this conversation, because 港澳臺 would not longer be necessary for my agenda. If 港澳臺 become independent and desinicised, then the brand of Chinese culture promulgated by the PRC would become the only remaining representative of the Chinese nation. This, to me, is unacceptable.

[ParkeNYU]

I admire your idea of spreading these things. I also wonder just how many people you feel you need to influence to make a difference? and do think you could?

 

Do you think you stand the proverbial snowballs chance in making a difference?

 

I may not be able to change much, but I feel a sense of purpose when I attempt to. What else can I do, right? Like many movements throughout history, if each person just carries one brick, you could have a pyramid some day, perhaps even long after the first bricklayer has passed on. I tend to look at the immortal human legacy rather than the mortal human individual, for those who haven't noticed already. There is no shame in being an ant in a colony; they can accomplish great things.

 

How old are you? The reason I ask is because this sounds like the idealistic talk of young people aged 16 - 35ish. I would suspect you are about 25. I also am prepared to be completely wrong, there is no certainty about this sort of thing. When I was 20 something I was going to radically change the world, now in my older years I like to think I am wiser.

 

I am indeed exactly 25 years old and 22 days. Right on the mark! Yes, I am idealistic because this is how I find meaning in life. To shrug and say 'welp, that's life' is rather unfulfilling. The great thing about idealism is that a hundred idealists each intending to effect a 100% change will collectively make a 1% difference; one who is content will the status quo will make a 0% difference.

[Guest realmayo]

The best lack all conviction, while the worst......

 

  But actually, I'm sure you're not the worst, ParkeNYU !

[Angelina]

Yeats!!!!!!

[querido]

Oh Icarus, I hope you find peace someday. Until then, I can tell you that a good and true lover would be helpful. 

[Shelley]

Well don't let me take the wind out of your sails, you go out there and spread the word.

 

When you are older and wiser you may come to see the sense in this:

 

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference.    

[ParkeNYU]

Yeats and I don't always see eye to eye.

 

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, The courage to change the things I can, And the wisdom to know the difference.

 

The only way to truly know the difference is through one's own trial and error. Perhaps this trial and error stage is a necessary part of growing up.

[Shelley]

Indeed, there is a lot of living to do towards growing up, but don't necessarily grow up just grow wiser.

 

You need to make your own mistakes and find your own triumphs, no amount of telling you will make any difference, you need to do it for yourself.

 

Just remember you are not the first and won't be last to want to change the world.

 

Go for it, grab life with both hands and above all learn, learn from everything and everyone.