Why China prefers 'disaster' to 'war' on Taiwan

By Ching Cheong

SINGAPORE: Even though it was a three-day conference filled with rhetoric warning Taiwan against choosing independence, what was also apparent were Beijing's efforts to avert military confrontation at all cost.

So while Xin Qi, a research fellow at the military-backed think-tank, Center for Research on Peace and Development (CRPD), spoke strongly about how Taiwan's deviation from the "one-China principle" would reignite a civil war, a top Chinese negotiator on Taiwan deliberately avoided using "war".

Instead, Tang Shubei, who is vice-chairman of the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (Arats), the body handling cross-strait relations, chose the term meaning "disaster".

The dispatch by the official Xinhua news agency on Thursday quoting him as saying that the failure to uphold the "one-China principle" would result in "not peace, but war" caused a stir among the foreign media.

Apparently, the Chinese words for "war" were contained in his prepared text, which was what Xinhua based its report on.

When he spoke, however, he dropped "war" in favor of "disaster".

This reluctance to use the term "war" reflected a political subtlety: subconsciously, Beijing wants to avoid any military confrontation with Taiwan.

Taiwan's President-elect Chen Shui-bian has said openly that people should not place too much hope on his May 20 inaugural speech to solve age-old problems.

By this, he means that he would not be upholding the "one- China principle" as requested by Beijing. Knowing that Chen was reluctant to accept the "one-China principle", Beijing has been lowering its demand on that principle.

Beijing used to define "one China" as the People's Republic of China.

Now, its definition comes in three parts: There is only one China. Taiwan is part of China. The sovereignty and territorial integrity of China is inviolable.

Tang stressed that this concept of one China was also embodied in Taiwan's own National Unification Guidelines and should therefore be acceptable to the island.

He also said that Beijing was willing to return to the 1992 consensus reached by both sides on "one China".

This consensus had up to now been verbally defined.

At the Shenzhen conference on Thursday, Tang provided a written version of that consensus.

Beijing, he said, maintained that "both sides of the Taiwan Strait uphold the 'one-China principle' and strive to achieve national unification."

"In dealing with practical issues across the strait, no reference will be made to the political implications of one China".

Taipei pledged that "in the process of achieving national unification, both sides uphold the 'one China principle'. As to the definition of 'one China', both sides had different points of view", he said.

He disputed Taiwan's claim that the two sides had reached a consensus on "one China, different descriptions", saying that this departed from the original understanding.

He said: "As long as Taipei is willing to return to the 1992 consensus, it is fine with us."

It is clear from this that in Beijing's view, it is Taiwan's departure from the 1992 consensus that has caused all the tension.

Chen's concern is that accepting the "one-China principle" would relegate Taiwan to a subordinate position, or turn the Taiwanese authorities into a local government of China.

Addressing this concern, Tang reiterated Beijing's position as laid down in the White Paper on Taiwan. This is that cross-strait negotiations are not those between the central government and local authorities, but talks on an equal footing to be held under the "one-China principle".

Going by the pains the Arats official took to try and persuade Chen to return to the "one-China principle", the conclusion to be drawn would be that Beijing wants to avoid war if possible.

Research fellow Xin Qi even said that just by admitting that he is a Chinese, Chen would be helping to ease cross-strait tension.

Tang stressed many times that it was the Taiwanese who are calling the shots in deciding whether there is war or peace, and in deciding the time-table for reunification.

And with that, China has put the ball back in Chen's court.

The writer is East Asia Correspondent of the Singapore-based The Strait Times daily.

The Strait Times/Asia News Network