Ever since Woodrow Wilson articulated it in his Fourteen Points, the concept of self-determination has been at the forefront of various movements pursuing the goal of independence. In a nutshell, self-determination is the freedom to decide actions without the imposition of will by others. For nationalist groups, this means the right to govern themselves without the compulsion of another state, and it generally involves some sort of uprising or conflict against such external party or parties.

Cast in the light of the nationalist wave that swept the world in the 20^th century, self-determination is now conceptualized as a right that different peoples are entitled to. It is now commonplace to speak of how the Palestinians deserve their own state or the right of the Tibetans to their own country. But acknowledging a right to something is not the same as saying that something should be given. That a group deserves independence does not necessarily mean they should get it.

Why Independence?

What are legitimate reasons to seek independence? What is the purpose of independence? Is it to satisfy a claim to historical and cultural rights? Certainly to some extent: the validity and legitimacy based in national pride or heritage may be crucial to a functioning society. Independence has also generally recognized the principle of freedom as perhaps the most important to aspire to. However, an implicit reason in all of this is the protection of human security. Under what circumstances will the people be able to live free from fear and have a better standard of living? Does independence bring people closer to that?

We assume that independence movements believe their lives would be better off in a different political arrangement than the one they are currently in. But just because they believe this does not make it so. In order to assess the validity of an independence movement, it is important to look at the viability of the state they are trying to create. Does the situation on the ground suggest that an independent state could function economically, politically, and socially?

Claims by independence movements themselves are also often based on highly sensitive or emotional factors, particularly for people who have suffered under oppression. While these are very important to assessing the validity of a movement, they should not be solely relied upon. These groups have an interest in making a strong case for independence – which historical oppression and cultural sovereignty lend themselves easily to. As such, they also have an interest in downplaying any practical difficulties in building an independent state. These practical realities – potential for economic growth, ability to maintain internal cohesion, whether or not its sovereignty will be respected by its neighbors – must be evaluated as objectively as possible. Subjective factors should not be ignored, but they should be looked at independently to avoid diluting the clarity of practical considerations. Justice and fairness have their place, but that place is not in making a state seem more economically viable that it really is.

The Case of Taiwanese Sovereignty

By all accounts Taiwan is a sovereign state. It has its own government, military, economy, currency, passports, culture, and infrastructure. Unfortunately, it also lacks legal recognition of its sovereignty from almost ninety percent of the world’s countries. Like Tibet, the government of China claims Taiwan as part of its territory. Taiwan is unable to acquire legal independence as China blocks any move towards this.

Since Taiwan already has de facto sovereignty, it is important to ask what the island has to gain from establishing formal independence. It has one the most impressive economies in the world – generally ranking in the top 20 or 30 largest. Real GDP (gross domestic product) growth has averaged around 8-9% for the past few decades, and its per capita GDP is among the highest in Asia (by the CIA’s accounts surpassed only by Brunei, Hong Kong, and Japan). It has strong healthcare, education, and transportation systems. It is also a leading producer of high-technology products and services, owing to leading research in mechanical and electrical engineering at various institutes and universities.

The benefits of formal independence – outside of national pride – do not seem to be that significant. Right now Taiwan cannot join any international organizations as a formal member, but it participates in the global community in other ways – through investment, business partnerships, coordination between academic institutions, and development projects. Simply gaining a seat on the UN – whose structure still reflects the much changed power realities of post-WWII – is worth almost nothing in the international politics of today.

One of the greatest difficulties of its legal status is that Taiwan cannot hold diplomatic relations with the countries that do recognize it. This has led to legal problems in the past such as domestic criminals who flee to other countries. Taiwan cannot request extradition to try the criminals at home since they do not have an effective diplomatic presence – making the island appear rather helpless. Still, at least on the surface, any benefits of independence seem greatly outweighed by the potential consequences of provoking China.

However, I recently learned of problems that run deeper into society. Since the election of President Ma-Ying Jeou in 2008, tensions between the Pan-Blue Coalition (originally pro-unification, now pro-status quo) and the Pan-Green Coalition (pro-independence) have steadily escalated. A good friend recently told me that he has encountered the question “are you green or blue?” a number of times. This same friend also argues that Taiwan should either pursue true unification or independence, not the so-called status quo. His argument was that as long as the country was divided, it would be weak.

Pages: 1 2

This entry was posted on Friday, June 26th, 2009 at 7:00 am and is filed under History, Politics & Business. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.