Yao Ming Rejected for Taiwan Charity Visit, China Times Reports

I don't see China's rights over Taiwan has anything to do with the USA and Britain that couldn't come to terms. China said anything is negotiable as long as Taiwan acknowledge China's rights, which mean she is willing to grant autonomous conditions far more favorable to Taiwan than that of HK and Macau. China and Chinese are willing to respect Taiwan's self governing as long as it territorial rights and sovereignty is repected in return.

 

The feeling is mutual.

 

And just what does that mean? That Taiwan can retain it's own military, and refuse overflights by China? That Taiwan can refuse basing rights to China? That Taiwan can have free and open elections like Hong Kong was promised? Oh, and whatever happened to those elections?



D&D. Impeach Bush and Cheney.

 

wrong again rookie...

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSTP215322

http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/news/stories/s1946983.htm

http://zonaeuropa.com/20060425_1.htm

http://news.yam.com/chinatimes/politics/200703/20070318039569.html

taiwan loses these allies primarily because we don't care to match the stupid high payouts your own govt is willing to make instead of feeding your own people.

 

and then on page 26... we find out that Yao had actually gotten the visa...

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...Z_01_TP305439_RTRUKOC_0_US-TAIWAN-YAOMING.xml

so will all the impartial chinese posters come out and give the taiwanese govt the praise it deserves?

 

Hmmm, when I travel to California, Nevada, New Mexico, etc. I don't need to have a Visa. Seems like Visas are required for work in a foreign country -- why would Yao need a Visa for Taiwan if it was a part of China?


I hope Yao doesn't forget his Passport.

 

US citizens are not required to apply for visas when they enter Canada, does it make Canada part of the US?

Mainland Chinese are required to obtain some sort of paperwork to enter Hong Kong SAR, does it mean Hong Kong is not part of China?

Back in the good ol' days, people of color in the *United States* were required to get permissions from whites to enter and/or work in white-only territories in much of the segregated US South, were those colored people not Americans, or were the United States not a one country?

 

Yao can just say he's a tall Taiwanese Yao impersonator.

 

Nice reversal for Taiwan....but WHO'S GONNA PAY FOR THE DAMAGE DONE ON THIS TOPIC???

 

China has no claim to Taiwan. It has no prior claim to the land itself, and it has no ownership of the people OR the government of the land. Therefore any claim that the people of Taiwan or its government should be under ROC jurisdiction/control is bogus and just part of a bully-boy tactic. China used to want Taiwan in part because of all the manufacturing industries during the 80s and 90s, but now that most of those have moved onto the mainland to take advantage of the low wages, corrupt local government noobs, and lax environmental protections in China, it seems to me like purely political crap.

Sure, it might seem petty that people from pretty much the same cultural and ethnic origins would get so tense over such an issue. But that's what human relations have been like since...well, since forever.

 

HK already had free and open elections before China took it back, only it was restricted to the district level, the governor of HK, was appointed by the British government. Those district level elections are still in place today in HK, and the election for the governor is a work in progress.

Due to Taiwan's problem being more serious than HK with this confrontation, China would be willing to grant more autonomous conditions to Taiwan than HK and Macau. What shape do those conditions take eventually is to be decided as a result of bargaining between two sides, in order to facilitate negotiation, China said anything is negotiable as long as the bottom line of China's territorial rights are acknowledged. The Taiwan Segregationists have been staunch in not talking with China. In fact, when China said that, like HK, the mainland government will not take any tax money from Taiwan after reunification, the response from the Segregationists camp is to twist things by saying China is trying to bribe Taiwanese with tax refund. Such attitude is what prolongs the confrontation between the Taiwan Straits.

 

Denying Yao for humanitarian/charity purposes is something to be proud of? I guess we have heard it all now...

 

It does if the basis of the claim on Taiwan is that it is a renegade province. Remember the US started as 13 renegade colonies of England.

I too would like to hear what terms the PRC is willing to grant to Taiwan.

 

Right - doctor Yao can rejuvenate some poor taiwanese.....

 

The problem with this line of argument then that would mean that the ROC government is the legitimate government of all of China not the PRC. You can't claim legitimacy on the part of the ROC's Constitution and then argue that it is an illegitimate rebel government.

That's the point though the ROC government can't functionally claim to represent all of China and functionally it isn't.

Also for that matter my understanding is that the ROC government has given up its claims to representing all of China and done away with having legislative seats for districts on the mainland as it once did.

If a portion of a territory conducts its own foreign policy, controls its own military and doesn't allow the government of the other part to control soveriegnity it is functionally an independent country. The key indicators of nationhood are the ability to conduct foreign policy and maintain a military.

That's possibly so but you can't change history. Time does matter and the fact that Taiwan has functioned fine apart from the rest of China for more than 50 years is important.

 

To a certain point it did but the problem was that they never got another key factor of nationhood in terms of being able to have their own foreign policy and for that matter they never claimed being their own country either. I would say if the Kurdish territory of Iraq does those things and are able to keep from being completely overrunn by their neighbors they will have earned the right to be their own country.

I will agree that "nationhood" isn't always cut and dry but there are certainly things that you could point to and say that is a separate country. The main issues are having final say over your own government, maintaining independent control of your own military and having your own foriegn policy. As long as you can do those then for all practical considerations you are your own country.

 

Can the PRC base troops on Taiwan? Can the PRC veto political decisions of Taiwan? Can the PRC dictate Taiwan's foriegn policy? If the answer to any of those yes then you have a point but if the answer to all is no there is no practical basis of sovereignity.

"Soveriegnity" according to Webster's dictionary means supreme and independent political power as long as the PRC cannot exercise that over Taiwan it doesn't have soveriegnity. Claims to the otherwise are rhetoric with no practical basis.

Many of your so called Taiwan Segregationists have claimed they are independent. Al Qaeda terrorists camps have aspects of nationhood but lack a political authority or a foreign policy.

Again though can the PRC exercise sovereignity over Taiwan? As long as that answer is no then the fiction is that it isn't a country anymore than Cuban exile groups have a fiction that they are soveriegn over Cuba.

 

Lousy no edit function..

To be more precise I should say "As long as that answer is no then the fiction is that it isn't one country anymore than North Korea has the fiction they are soveriegn over South Korea."

 

Also just to reiterate again regarding whether Taiwan and the PRC should reunify I'm somewhat neutral on the issue. I do think there are many good reasons for Taiwan to unify and I think it would help them economically in the long run. That said the bellicose attitude of the PRC, as shown by some posts here, that threatens and refuses to consider anything but an absolute recognition of soveriegnity isn't helpful. If the PRC wants to Taiwan to come back it needs to show the people on Taiwan that they will be welcomed and respected rather than being subjugated. The language of calling them traitors and threats of invasions undermines trust between the two.

Also while the PRC can likely militarily overwhelm Taiwan it will be a very very costly victory. While there are many on Taiwan who eventually favor reunification not many favor a reunification through military conquest and will fight very hard against a PRC invasion. At the same time a war between the two will cripple the PRC economy, Asia's and the whole world's.

 

Once Taiwan becomes a drop in the ocean, I doubt the terms would become a big issue other than being a political wedge to eek out more regional concessions from central government.

But if you use the argument that both sides are locked in a civil war similar to N and S Korea, then legitimacy is about official recognition from the world community, which the ROC lost in the 70s.

It's a strong argument. Just look at what the US did to Colombia when we created Panama.

Most Taiwanese don't care about official independence as long as their homes aren't being bombed or starved out from some blockade. Mostly they care about the economy and how embarrassing their politicians are. I don't think reunification at this point would be the stability Taiwanese have been accustomed to for the past 50 years.