Anti-secession law merely will of people

(China Daily)
Updated: 2005-03-09 06:07

Some politicians in Taiwan want international observers to view Beijing as a new source of threat to peace. As China's draft anti-secession law is submitted for debate and approval by the National People's Congress (NPC), now in session in Beijing, the island's politicians are telling the world that it is a war bill, as if they know the bill's content better than the lawmakers in the Great Hall of the People.

In fact, as anyone can see just by looking at NPC Standing Committee Vice-Chairman Wang Zhaoguo's explanation of the draft bill, all its basic points regarding the political status of Taiwan have been consistent and don't contain any deviation from the past.

The People's Republic has always made it clear that Taiwan is part of China, and that it will prevent any attempt towards the region's breaking away from its motherland. This has long been written in the nation's Constitution, China's most fundamental law.

The fact is, however, that leaders of the Chinese mainland have always expressed their sincerity in seeking a peaceful solution through talks across the Taiwan Straits. And in the draft anti-secession bill, "non-peaceful" means are defined only as a last resort. So, China would only deploy non-peaceful means should all efforts for peaceful reunification prove futile.

The mainland has taken many actions to back up its preference for peace. And some talks did take place in the 1990s. Also, in 1992, representatives from both sides signed an informal agreement.

But, under Chen Shui-bian, the current Democratic Progressive Party administration does not seem to want to take the 1992 consensus any further, and from time to time, fervently backpedal.

In the meantime, the central government has been advising the Taiwan authorities not to mix politics with business ties, and in so doing, leave adequate room for cross-Straits interests to flourish on the people-to-people level. The intention for peace is unmistakable here. No government preparing for an imminent war would have logically made any endeavours in this direction, that is, to develop business in a potential war zone.

In contrast, it is the Taiwan authorities who, while spending increasing money on sophisticated weaponry, have attempted to restrict any direct cross-Straits contact.

In fact, it was only when Chen Shui-bian openly stated his "legislative" agenda and timetable to pursue Taiwan's independence that appeals began to gather in the mainland calling for legislative counter-measures. Anyone able to read Mandarin can easily trace the bill's origin to the calls for anti-secessionist legislation from all walks of life in China and overseas Chinese communities.

If, as some Taiwan politicians told Western journalists, the Chinese anti-secession law is a law to be made, interpreted and executed by the same people, they are in a way quite correct. Few things can better unite the Chinese as a nation than the peaceful reunification of the motherland. The law shows their will and shared interests.

On the other hand, when did the Taiwan secessionists remember to consult with the 1.3 billion people in the mainland in their push for independence from China? And what is surprising if a law governing a Chinese issue is to be made by the Chinese? Who might be better suited for the job? Taiwan is part of China and Chinese lawmakers are making a law for it. Nothing less and nothing more.

(China Daily 03/09/2005 page4)