And, if the whole world one day came to its senses and called a spade a spade, would anything actually happen?

One of the reasons* I choose (and it is a choice) to be a blogger (a word I still don't like) more than a bona fide print journalist, busting my tuckus to get the story, is because I have a problem accepting the fact that I just don’t know everything. I have a hard time writing sentences that include phrases like “Taiwanese people think…” or “French people aren’t…” because I know too many people from too many from too many different places who agree and too many people from one place who all disagree. Yet, it seems to me that you have to be able to make those sort of judgments — or pretend that such judgments (which is a nice way of saying “reckless generalizations") hold water.

I mention this because I have, for quite some time, wanted to write about the steady flow of news that is the Taiwan UN Saga. I’ve been trying to tame my inner Zach de la Rocha and force myself to make sure I know all of the facts as best I can. This is the other reason I couldn’t work for a newspaper, because I like to back up everything that I can. I could never write a sentence like “Taiwan and China have been separate since the KMT fled to the island in 1949,” the shear amount of historical discrepancy that is stated as fact would give me cold sweats — and unfortunately, no newspaper would print “Taiwan and China may or may not have separated because of the KMT’s arrival on the island in 1949, seeing as there is debate over the word 'separate' due to the fact that there were people on said island before, some of whom were of Chinese descent, others of aboriginal, and still others of Japanese or mix origins. Even if there were people of Chinese descent on the island at the time, there are also a fair amount of people who contest the KMT's legal claim to the Qing Dynasty’s old territories because (1) the Qing didn’t actually control the whole island (2) Taiwan still technically belonged to the Japanese when the KMT came (3) the Taiwanese people had already displayed a desire for self-government.” These newspapers have space to save, you know, so they’ve got to pack these facts in.

As I said, I’ve been trying to be honest with myself and make sure that I’m not just caving to what seems in my gut to be the right thing (Taiwan being an independent country, or at least a member of the UN nations, the WHO, and certain international economic organizations that hold statehood as a prerequisite) and try to get a grip on what the opposing arguments (other than China’s) actually are.

One thing, though, I can’t get passed in all of my searching is the nagging feeling that Taiwan is being snubbed, nagged, and shunned by and large for fear of what China might do. If Taiwan does anything to exercise what is its right as a functioning, democratic, developed country — tries to enter the WHO or the UN, asserts its national identity, scraps the symbolic unification council, or eats with its elbows on the table — it's Taiwan that receives the blame for China’s heavy-handed response.

Meanwhile, China can pile missiles (now over a thousand) on the other side of the Strait. It’s alright because the lapse is a result of Taiwan’s provocation. Taiwan should know that exercising what should be its right as a sovereign nation is, for China, reason to threaten a war that holds disastrous global implications. Keep in mind, Taiwan has not to my knowledge threatened China militarily. It is China that is peppering its coast with strong arms and threatening to use them, yet it is Taiwan who is violating the almighty status quo (which is Latin for "three way mirror").

The “reasonable,” don’t-just-go-with-your-gut side of me wanted to say, “But consider what so many people are pushing for.” This is to say, there are those who are appeasing China and placating Taiwan just as long as it takes for China to be a respectable, democratic country, so that there would be no risk of war if Taiwan declared independence — or even the possibility that Taiwan would accept becoming a part of this future China.

That’s great. I have grave doubts that it’ll happen that way, though. I believe in markets and globalization. I believe in the good that comes from a world where countries are more and more integrated into a global trade network, making them think twice about bombing so-and-so for whatnot. It should be very clear — for all of those who may think I’m just a hawk who gets warm-fuzzies thinking of the charred remains of those who “deserved it” — I don’t want war. I hope that it will never come to that.

Yet, I don’t believe in denying Taiwan what it deserves for the sake of holding back a seething beast (NOTE: this is not my view of China, it is my view of the PLA). The Taiwanese should not — and probably will not — wait to be recognized for what their country is — a sovereign, democratic, developed, and independent.

As for appeasing China, take what President Chen said recently:

We appeal to the democratic world to support us. Think of the historic example of the 1938 Munich Agreement, under which Hitler was granted the Sudetenland region. England and France wanted to appease him, but only one year later the Second World War broke out. If we make compromises with a dictatorship today we will only encourage other dictators. Small countries will suffer as a result.

Just as recognizing Taiwan as an independent nation might be the spark that set the prairie fire going — “provoking” an attack from China — appeasing China isn’t a guaranteed preclusion of an attack, either.

I think, as the world is starting to see more and more, now with Myanmar, that China is helping out a lot of shady folks, this will only add more fuel to the fire burning in Taiwan. One complication is that Bush, the Decider, doesn’t believe in talking to enemies (cue picture of Reagan with Gorbachev at the height of the Cold War) so China holds much more sway than it should in negotiating with strange folk.

In light of all of this, one nagging question persists: Taiwan and China are already separate — I don’t think anyone honestly denies that. They have their own governments, their own currencies, their own laws. What, theoretically, would happen if the whole world was suddenly behind Taiwan? If the entire world said Taiwan is a sovereign, independent member of the international community, what would China be able to do about it? An attack would have no credibility. Moreover, if China didn’t attack, nothing would actual happen — other than de jure status for a country that has for decades had de facto independence. Trade would carry on. Taiwanese people would still invest in China, wouldn’t they?

Is there something I’m not seeing? Isn't recognition across the board better for the world than this theater that we have now?

* The other being the fact that I can use "I" and write things as I see them, not pretending that what I write is just what other people saw, and say what I think, instead of having to find someone who believes the same thing as me so that I can indirectly say what I believe. I like Joseph Addison journalism, not NY Times journalism.