On March 8, Wang Zhaoguo, the vice-chairman of the NPC Standing Committee, introduced a draft of a law entitled, "The Anti-Secession Law," to members of the Chinese parliament in regards to the long-standing debate between mainland China and the island of Taiwan.
Standing in front of an assembled parliament, Mr. Zhaguo stated,"China's Constitution clearly stipulates, 'Taiwan is part of the sacred territory of the People's Republic of China. It is the inviolable duty of all Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan, to accomplish the great task of reunifying the motherland.' This is the constitutional ground for this legislation."
The main contents of the draft include:
- The scope of the law, in that it was designed to promote peaceful reunification of China and Taiwan, safeguard the common interests of China and also those of Taiwanese compatriots, and to prevent Taiwanese secession from China according to the Chinese constitution.
- Reiteration of China's view that the creation of a separate political system in Taiwan during the civil war of the 1940s did not define Taiwan as a separate entity from mainland China, and that, under no circumstances would the Chinese government allow a declaration of independence from Taiwan to exist. Additionally, the Chinese government would retaliate against any nation interfering in what it deems an internal struggle.
- The mandate that Taiwan submit to the policy that it is part of the Chinese sovereign nation, and every effort at peace will be exhausted to achieve that purpose by the Chinese government. Once Taiwan has completed the reunification process of lowering arms and subjecting itself to Chinese rule, the law allows for a separate, autonomous system of government within Taiwan, and healthy promotion of trade between it and China.
- Legislation providing that, "in the event that the 'Taiwan independence' forces should act under any name or by any means to cause the fact of Taiwan's secession from China . . . the state shall employ non-peaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity." Included are the use of military options against "Taiwan independence forces" via targetted attacks so as to minimize loss of infrastructure, property, and Taiwanese civilian life.
In response, the Mainland Affairs Council of Taiwan offered this statement:
...
The Republic of China pursues free democracy and have always receive high-level of recognition from the international community. The Taiwanese government believes that "the best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom and democracy throughout the world." This is also the same value which the United States of America, Japan, European Union and other countries pursue with Republic of China. This is the biggest difference between the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China. The MAC stresses that, the collective will of the Taiwanese people is expressed through democratic processes. But the Chinese authorities intend to suppress the Taiwanese people with "non-peaceful" and "non-democratic" measures. This shows a clear lack of democratic knowledge by the Chinese authorities and is also the worst ill intended trampling of international human rights and value of democracy.
...
In what may seem an unusual move, the Chinese government pre-empted surprising the Bush Administration by sending Chen Yunlin, the Minister of Taiwan Affairs, to meet with State Department officials on January 5, 2005 to discuss the implications of the intended legislation. However, when asked on February 2 about the Administration's thoughts of Chinese-Taiwan relations, White House spokesman Scott McClellan made no mention of this visit. Questioned on March 8 about Mr. Zhaguo's speech, he replied:
We view it as unhelpful and something that runs counter to recent trends toward a warming in cross-strait relations. We would call on Beijing to reconsider passage of the law. The draft law that was presented allows for punitive measures directed at Taiwan. We oppose any attempts to determine the future of Taiwan by anything other than peaceful means, and our views are very well known, in terms of our continued commitment to a one China policy that upholds the
three communiques and does not support Taiwan independence. We oppose any attempts to unilaterally change the status quo, and that is our view.
The proposed legislation is set for a vote by the Chinese parliament on March 14.