Taiwan’s legislative elections of December 2001 saw the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) replace the traditionally-dominant Kuomintang (KMT) as the largest party in Taiwan's legislature.

The DPP now holds 87 seats in the legislature compared to the KMT's 68. However, the People's First Party (PFP), ideologically similar to the KMT, has a strong presence with 46 seats. No single party will dominate the legislature. As before the election, compromises will be necessary for the legislature to carry out its business.

The near-term importance of this development is improved domestic political standing for the DPP and for Taiwan's previously embattled president, Chen Shui-bian, whom the DPP supports.

The long-term significance is an additional indication, from a PRC perspective, that Taiwan is drifting toward independence from China.

The present leadership of the KMT views Taiwan as part of China, while the DPP holds that Taiwan is a nation distinct from China. Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian's strengthened political position at home disappoints PRC officials who have hoped he would be a weak, one-term president. The election does not herald a major change in cross-Strait relations.

On the PRC side, domestic politics for the next few years will make it difficult for Beijing to exhibit more flexibility than it showed in its Taiwan policy before the elections.

On the Taiwan side, the election was not a referendum on Chen's China policy and Chen has shown no desire to move closer to formal independence.

But neither is Taiwan's government likely to make a major political concession in the near future, such as acceptance of the "one-China" principle as a precondition for cross-Strait talks.

Relations between China and Taiwan feature a mix of potentially destabilizing elements, including assertive nationalism in both China and Taiwan, and potentially stabilizing elements, including growing cross-Strait economic interaction, a solid majority of the Taiwanese population opposed to formally declaring independence, and a military balance that presently offers little prospect that the PRC could forcibly reincorporate Taiwan.

While China has a strong interest in peaceful relations with the USA, an advance of pro-independence sentiment in Taiwan would increase the possibility of a conflict between China and the United States.

The United States should continue to play its stabilizing role by discouraging both the use of military force by China and a formal declaration of independence by Taiwan.

The question that arises is that with the North Korea question, the Japanese problems with the WWII colonies and the possibility of it amending the Constitution to become more militarily cognisable, the fundamental awareness in Indonesia and Thailand rising, the upsurge in Chinese economy and industrialisation and the Chinese question of Taiwan in its new avatar, how will it impact the powerplay in the Pacific rim?

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

Taiwan’s legislative elections of December 2001 saw the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) replace the traditionally-dominant Kuomintang (KMT) as the largest party in Taiwan's legislature.

The DPP now holds 87 seats in the legislature compared to the KMT's 68. However, the People's First Party (PFP), ideologically similar to the KMT, has a strong presence with 46 seats. No single party will dominate the legislature. As before the election, compromises will be necessary for the legislature to carry out its business.

The near-term importance of this development is improved domestic political standing for the DPP and for Taiwan's previously embattled president, Chen Shui-bian, whom the DPP supports.

The long-term significance is an additional indication, from a PRC perspective, that Taiwan is drifting toward independence from China.

The present leadership of the KMT views Taiwan as part of China, while the DPP holds that Taiwan is a nation distinct from China. Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian's strengthened political position at home disappoints PRC officials who have hoped he would be a weak, one-term president. The election does not herald a major change in cross-Strait relations.

On the PRC side, domestic politics for the next few years will make it difficult for Beijing to exhibit more flexibility than it showed in its Taiwan policy before the elections.

On the Taiwan side, the election was not a referendum on Chen's China policy and Chen has shown no desire to move closer to formal independence.

But neither is Taiwan's government likely to make a major political concession in the near future, such as acceptance of the "one-China" principle as a precondition for cross-Strait talks.

Relations between China and Taiwan feature a mix of potentially destabilizing elements, including assertive nationalism in both China and Taiwan, and potentially stabilizing elements, including growing cross-Strait economic interaction, a solid majority of the Taiwanese population opposed to formally declaring independence, and a military balance that presently offers little prospect that the PRC could forcibly reincorporate Taiwan.

While China has a strong interest in peaceful relations with the USA, an advance of pro-independence sentiment in Taiwan would increase the possibility of a conflict between China and the United States.

The United States should continue to play its stabilizing role by discouraging both the use of military force by China and a formal declaration of independence by Taiwan.

The question that arises is that with the North Korea question, the Japanese problems with the WWII colonies and the possibility of it amending the Constitution to become more militarily cognisable, the fundamental awareness in Indonesia and Thailand rising, the upsurge in Chinese economy and industrialisation and the Chinese question of Taiwan in its new avatar, how will it impact the powerplay in the Pacific rim?

the point is, US want to use taiwan to attack on china for human rights issue, to hinder china'sforeign relations with other countries, to prevent the lift of embargo.

the more US plays with taiwan, the more possiblity violence will occur, so if US want to play a stablising role, then stay out of it. china will not
invade if taiwan position is the same as it is today.

taiwan is a terrotory of china, but just with different political view.

During the GOP in Philadelphia in August 2000, it was stated:

Our policy is based on the principle that there must be no use of force by China against Taiwan. We deny the right of Beijing to impose its rule on the free Taiwanese people. All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China violates these principles and attacks Taiwan, then the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself.

This does not per se show any aggressive intent of the US towards China. It only states that the imbroglio be resolved peacefully and mutually agreed to.

Notwithstanding, given the GOP statement, the North Korean Standoff, the Japanese stand on being more militarist, the dispute on the Paracel Islands, Islamic fundamentalism rising in Indonesia and Thailand and the fact that the oil to Vhina has to pass thorugh the Malacca Strats, what do you think would be the strategic scenario in the Pacific Rim? In other words, what would be the interest of the littoral states, the US, China and other regional players in this region to uphold and further their national interests.

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

During the GOP in Philadelphia in August 2000, it was stated:

Our policy is based on the principle that there must be no use of force by China against Taiwan. We deny the right of Beijing to impose its rule on the free Taiwanese people. All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China violates these principles and attacks Taiwan, then the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself.

This does not per se show any aggressive intent of the US towards China. It only states that the imbroglio be resolved peacefully and mutually agreed to.

Notwithstanding, given the GOP statement, the North Korean Standoff, the Japanese stand on being more militarist, the dispute on the Paracel Islands, Islamic fundamentalism rising in Indonesia and Thailand and the fact that the oil to Vhina has to pass thorugh the Malacca Strats, what do you think would be the strategic scenario in the Pacific Rim? In other words, what would be the interest of the littoral states, the US, China and other regional players in this region to uphold and further their national interests.

Right, now as u said before, do u honeslty believe is for the human rights of the people while it invade iraq? US tend to say its for human rights but then its for national interest.

US know china cannot concentrate fully to develop its foreign relations with other countries, as i mention before, US like to attack china with human rights issue, u got to know in china's style of gov, u cannot have full human rights.

attack china with human rights can link witht eh history china has done, therefore proves much more effective, since china is not invading or not playing anything that will cause critism, but the only reason that could critise china most effectively is taiwan.

another point, why would US want a stronger china? if taiwan unite, US know china would be much stronger. china in the future can rival US. US would want to do anything to keep china down. each countries' national interest is to be more powerful than another nation, with all the means it to stop it.

the statement is already flawed, take alook at this: "All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China violates these principles and attacks Taiwan, then the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself."

the point is, things cannot be resolved peacefully if US encourage taiwan to declare independance, then US "expects" to encourage china to deal peacefully, if china said not to invade if taiwan goes inderpendant, do u think taiwan wouldnt be an independent country now? everyone even US knows that. then US goes and stir it up (which will cause voilence) then blame china to deal peacefully, but if china do so, that means china will lose this terriorty, clever US playing. this statement shows US wanted to use force against china. making an excuse for it to rightfully declare war. or perhaps wanted to test if china would have the guts to invade taiwan while US is threatening china, to see if china would turn down due to US or not.

It is nice to know the Chinese view, if indeed you are a Communist Chinese. I can't make out anything from your flag since it is too small.

From the international media, it appears that the Taiwanese don't want ot join China. Is that correct? If not, can you give some facts that prove otherwise?

As I understand, Taiwan is but a small island (compared to China) and it has hills and so less habaitable places. I don't understand as to how Taiwan with China would make China any stronger, except of course economically.

Do let me know since I am keen to know.

However, my request is don't lose your cool. I will ask many questions if you will allow and some may be difficult, but I sincerely want to know how a genuine Chinese feels about it and why.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by gingerbeard

Right, now as u said before, do u honeslty believe is for the human rights of the people while it invade iraq? US tend to say its for human rights but then its for national interest.

US know china cannot concentrate fully to develop its foreign relations with other countries, as i mention before, US like to attack china with human rights issue, u got to know in china's style of gov, u cannot have full human rights.

attack china with human rights can link witht eh history china has done, therefore proves much more effective, since china is not invading or not playing anything that will cause critism, but the only reason that could critise china most effectively is taiwan.

another point, why would US want a stronger china? if taiwan unite, US know china would be much stronger. china in the future can rival US. US would want to do anything to keep china down. each countries' national interest is to be more powerful than another nation, with all the means it to stop it.

the statement is already flawed, take alook at this: "All issues regarding Taiwan's future must be resolved peacefully and must be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China violates these principles and attacks Taiwan, then the United States will respond appropriately in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act. America will help Taiwan defend itself."

the point is, things cannot be resolved peacefully if US encourage taiwan to declare independance, then US "expects" to encourage china to deal peacefully, if china said not to invade if taiwan goes inderpendant, do u think taiwan wouldnt be an independent country now? everyone even US knows that. then US goes and stir it up (which will cause voilence) then blame china to deal peacefully, but if china do so, that means china will lose this terriorty, clever US playing. this statement shows US wanted to use force against china. making an excuse for it to rightfully declare war. or perhaps wanted to test if china would have the guts to invade taiwan while US is threatening china, to see if china would turn down due to US or not.

The way I read it. It says that Taiwan should choose it's own destiny. And force used by the Peoples Republic would be met as per outlined in the Taiwan realtions Act.

To me that means if Taiwan declares it's indepence which it has every right to do if thats what its people want. And the peoples republic attacks. Then the US is bound by the act/treaty to assist it's Allie. I don't see that as a threat. More of a statement of where the US stands on the issue.

I would request that this not be made into a China Taiwan thread.

This thread is on the Pacific Rim powerplay and China just happens to be the major force here.

Nobody is really addressing the issue.

choose by themslves?
do u think china should let taiwanese chooses china's security environment?

do u know that china's 70% of GDP, 60% of population and 80% of western investment are 200 miles near sea......or u can say near taiwan....

if china does not have taiwan, or letting its enemy has taiwan, it will be very dangerous for china and its economy.....

just like U.S won't like cuba to have missiles on it..
china does not want a U.S "unsinkable" aircraft carrier 90miles near china's most populated and most rich regions

PLEASE tell me that somebody didn't just bring up Taiwan again!!!

For those that hadn't noticed, bringing up Taiwan works like this:

(As in MASSIVE FLAME WAR)

lol...that is because ppl dont know much about taiwan...and they often spit out ilogical things that just piss others off.....like "china invades taiwan because taiwan is democractic"...who cares if it is democratic.....it is just so insecure for china, just like letting cuba has soviets' missile on it..can americans sleep well??