Commentary on “A Modest Proposal for a Basic Agreement on Peaceful Cross-Strait Development” by Chang Ya-chung
This critique assesses Prof. Chang Ya-chung’s draft basic agreement for cross-Strait relations by arguing that it overstates changes in Beijing’s Taiwan policy, which is based on a strategy that has not seen substantial change since it was devised in the early 1990s to prevent the island’s democratization leading to the exercise of self-determination. By over-estimating Taiwan’s political, diplomatic, military, and economic vulnerability the proposal unnecessarily narrows down Taibei’s options to the point where it has to accept Beijing’s one-China principle. This merely closes off other options that Taiwan can just as readily pursue, such as continuing to develop cross-Strait relations through ad hoc solutions to practical problems or seeking more imaginative ways to create a durable modus vivendi with international support. Even more problematic is that a political framework for stability based on the principles of Chinese nationalism is unlikely to be acceptable for Taiwan’s liberaldemocratic politics and could thus amount to an unnecessary risk that would lead to a less durable cross-Strait status quo than that which has been maintained over the last two decades.
Volume (Year): 39 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Neuer Jungfernstieg 21, D-20354 Hamburg|
Phone: +49 (0)40 42825-593
Fax: +49 (0)40 42825-547
Web page: http://www.currentchineseaffairs.org
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Web: http://www.giga-hamburg.de/china-aktuell Email: |
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gig:chaktu:v:39:y:2010:i:1:p:149-162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Karsten Giese)or (Heike Holbig)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.