During Trump and Xi Jinping’s talk, Trump “agreed at the request of President Xi to honour our ‘One China’ policy.” And so did today’s conversations between Trump and Xi Jinping started: giving face to China.
One of the most ridiculous phenomena in modern international politics is the principle of “One China” upheld by the Chinese Communist Party, and their request for all countries wishing to establish diplomatic relations with the Chinese Communist Party to pursue this “One China” policy. Does America have any “One America” principle? Is the any other country in the world with any “One X Country” principle? No, there is none. Because no country in the world has actually two versions of itself; it is only China the one who, over and over again, stresses that there is only “One China.” And it is in fact because there are two Chinas that China, ignoring the facts, needs to stress incessantly that there is only “One China”.
In an article in The Economist entitled “One China, many meanings: Why the absurd one-China policy must be upheld,” it is said that “FEW diplomatic sophisms are as skilfully [sic] worded as America’s ‘one-China policy’. Mere repetition by American officials that their country sticks to it […] The one-China policy is a fudge.” It is clear that, in order to enter the territory of the Republic of China, a VISA issued by the People’s Republic of China is not valid; likewise, it is also clear that those with a passport from the Republic of China have VISA-free access to more than 100 countries (including the U.S.). However, the Chinese Communist Party wants to make the whole world acknowledge that there is only one China. Isn’t this a fudge?
After the election, Trump said that “I don’t know why we have to be bound by a one-China policy” and, afterwards, accepted a call from Tsai Ing-wen congratulating him. He was just respecting the facts, but it led to a tension in U.S.-China relations. Both U.S. and the rest of the world believe that the only way to secure peace in Asia is to follow the Chinese Communist Party’s lie of “There is only one China”; otherwise, the Chinese Communist Party may threaten to use force against Taiwan.
The U.S. has implemented the “One China” policy for more than 30 years, meaning recognizing “One China” while keeping substantial connections with Taiwan. Although this position ignores the facts, it does not compromise U.S. interests. Trump finally agreed to meet the requests of the Chinese Communist Party during his conversation with Xi Jinping because “if something is not broken, there is no need to fix it” [quotation needed]. Or as The Economist says, all countries follow the “One China” lie so that Asia can enjoy peace.
The “1992 Consensus” that the Chinese Communist Party insists Taiwan should accept is also a lie. Because the truth is that in 1992 there was no consensus at all. The KMT said that the “1992 Consensus” was “One China with respective interpretations”, whereas the CCP stressed that the “1992 Consensus” was the One China principle, without any respective interpretations. Where is the consensus here? But just as all the countries accept the lie of “One China,” so does the CCP demand Taiwan authorities to accept a non-existent “1992 Consensus.”
Actually, the idea of “One Country, Two Systems” is also a lie. A given system is the foundation of a state; the revolution of Sun Yat-sen wanted to establish the “Republican” system, and not a state called Republic of China. Mao Zedong’s revolution wanted to establish a socialist system, and not, initially, a state called People’s Republic of China. When Americans talk about patriotism, they emphasize the American Constitution, and so they think that if there is no constitution to protect the rights of the people, what is the point of having a state? First, you have to establish a system, and only after can a state be established. The reason and basis for the establishment of a state by its people is to establish a specific system. If a state can have two systems, or three systems, that means that the state is a fixed reality, whereas its system can change, be preserved or destroyed. If so, the actual territory of China should still be the Xia Dynasty. This does not only ignore the principle of establishing a state according to a specific system, or the fact that people would change the historical set a state [i.e., its borders] according to a specific system: it also shows the expediency and instability of the system.
“One China” is the greatest lie of the world; “One Country, Two Systems” is the next great lie.