Zexi Li | March 29th, 2022
150 fighter jets sent from Mainland China into Taiwan’s defence zone (1) Increased hackings into the feebler government’s activities (2). Performance of spectacular landing drills by China near the Taiwan Straits (3). Taiwanese people have all the rights to fear a potential invasion from China especially since their neighbour Hong Kong have fell under China’s yoke (4). The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) attempts of reunification have rather further distanced itself from the Republic of China (ROC). The escalating pressure exerted by the PRC (commonly referred to as “China”) on the ROC (commonly referred to as “Taiwan”) finds its roots in the Anti-Secession Law (ASL), enacted on March 15th, 2005 under the PRC’s Constitution.
The Anti-Secession Law broadly asserts Taiwan as a region of China and reinforces the One China policy—China’s view that the PRC, ROC, and Hong Kong are altogether one state. The goal of the ASL was to bind their original grand claims into a legal framework and provide legitimacy to their desire for reunification through the Constitution. The full text provides countless instances claiming Taiwan as a part of China (5) and bestowing on the Chinese people, including the Taiwanese people, the responsibility to reunify the country (6) (7) (8) (9). In the case that reunification fails, the PRC self-proclaimed the right to employ non-peaceful measures to achieve One China (10). In China’s view, the ASL aims to deter ‘separatist’ movements and foster peace and stability through regional integration and facilitation of cross-strait relations. This interpretation contrasts with the popular belief of the ASL’s aim to set grounds for a potential armed conflict (11).
However, Taiwan is not separatist (12). According to a survey conducted by the National Chengshi University, most Taiwanese people wish to preserve the current system of two separate governments with a stark minority advocating an immediate separation (13). Therefore, the PRC is claiming that actions building up to reunification will achieve “peace” in the Taiwan Straits region despite the dominant narrative in Taiwan of maintaining the current status quo—an already peaceful state (14). The only tangible results that the enaction and reaffirmation of the ASL has achieved was to exacerbate the tensions in the Taiwan Straits region. As a maladroit attempt to sway the Taiwanese, Article 9 of the law affirms that—would the need for military intervention arise—China would protect the safety and rights of Taiwan people, a stark antithesis.
Ultimately, the ASL lied at the foundation of China’s grand scheme, mixing both soft and hard power to pressure Taiwan into reunification and, more concretely, undermine the country’s democracy. Yet Taiwan under Ing-wen is resisting firmly, proactively refuting the law’s legitimacy.
The Anti-secession law serves as a case that law is not absolute and should certainly not always be followed. It should rather be seen as a forceful application of international law. While law abides by the fundamental principle of protecting citizens, it can also be used as an instrument of lobbyism and force to achieve political gains.
Through the ASL, China created a hard tool to back its soft claims. This is China’s innovation: based on an impractical ideology, the Government of the PRC devised a strategy to pressure Taiwan, undermine their democracy, and interfere in their political affairs and agenda. Even after 15 years of the law’s enactment, the Government celebrated and continues to celebrate the inauguration of the law and its reunification policies, sending the message about their growing influence and long-term intent to regain political control of its peripheral regions. Again, China has produced a clunky product signed with their arrogant ambition for power.
Comments