By Michael Riches
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Wang Wenbin on Aug. 11 compared Taiwanese independence efforts with Scotland’s attempts to split from the UK.
Scotland held a referendum on independence in 2014, and the result was close. About 45 percent of voters checked the “yes” box to split from the UK. Hoping that the tide has turned in favor of independence, the Scots are angling for a second try.
The Canadian province of Quebec went through two independence votes as well. The first, in 1980, saw the “yes” camp garner about 40 percent of the votes. In 1995, the share climbed to 49.5 percent — although in that case, the "new strategic partnership" described on the ballot left some voters confused about whether an actual split from Canada was on the cards. The Canadian government accepted the ambiguity and campaigned against independence on Quebec's terms.
If Scotland "split itself from the UK, would the UK remain calm, show restraint, sit by and watch the situation deteriorate?” Wang asked.
I have heard a similar argument from Chinese who evoked Quebec’s struggle when discussing Taiwanese sovereignty.
“How would you feel if Quebec separated?” they asked.
Sad, I would reply, but respectful of their decision.
Wang and others in China do not realize how much they are defeating their own claims to Taiwan when they make such comparisons. If they want to draw parallels between Taiwan, Scotland and Quebec, then the Chinese would do as the British and Canadians do, and offer Taiwan a vote on independence — and then be willing to honor the result if (and when) it does not go in their favor.
Given that the CCP believes Taiwan is Chinese territory, then it should be able to swallow its own analogy and provide its so-called "province" with the same peaceful territorial dispute mechanism that the UK grants Scotland.
Wang asked if the British would show "restraint" and "calm" in the face of losing Scotland. In fact, restraint and calm is exactly what they and the Canadian government did during independence campaigns. Instead of sending in their militaries, the central governments conducted measured campaigns to persuade residents to vote “no” and made their arguments with confidence.
The UK and Canada may not have “sat by,” to use Wang's words, when faced with separatist campaigns, but they did work to convince their territories to remain united. Neither did they consider sovereignty movements a “deterioration.” Rather, the calls for independence were treated as good-faith appeals for self determination.
In fact, Canada passed a post-referendum law in 2000 that outlined how negotiations should take place if any province voted to separate. They do not use anti-secession laws, which would be abhorrent to Canadian and British values.
Wang should realize that Canada and the UK have indeed demonstrated how to “remain calm” in the face of separatist campaigns. Granting the privilege to leave is in fact what fosters goodwill and makes the population feel valued. The hostility shown toward Taiwan, on the other hand, has not exactly cultivated much love.
Not that Taiwan needs China's permission to be independent, but if Beijing wants to make such comparisons, then by their own argument they should show the same goodwill to Taiwanese and stop making claims on a nation that would overwhelmingly reject Chinese control in a hypothetical referendum.
Perhaps I am naive to say that if China truly cared about the people of this nation, it would put its ego aside and offer Taiwanese the same dignity that the UK and Canada offer its people.
Of course, I understand why that would never happen, and I am aware of the multitude historical and cultural issues that emerge when that surface is scratched.
But any time a Chinese leader or pundit compares Taiwan with Scotland or Quebec, they sound ridiculous. Canada and the UK learned long ago how to settle nationhood disputes peacefully, an approach China has yet to attempt with Taiwan.
No comments:
Post a Comment