[Marxism] Jim Craven on Taiwan

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

Tony wrote:

Richard Fidler wants to suggest that the right of  a nation to
self-determination is the most important factor in working out an approach
to the Taiwan issue. I agree.

But the most salient feature of this situation is not the right of Taiwan
to self-determination but rather that same right for the People's Republic
of China. This right to self-determination has been opposed first by
Japanese and then by US imperialism.

In trying to make a case for Taiwanese self-determination, Richard is thus
forced to ignore the internal class dynamics of the situation as well as
the placement of the situation within a world dominated by great power
relations.

Response Jim C:

Exactly and further Richard obviously has no idea of what
facts-on-the-ground and international law (or even traditional Marxist
theory on the national question) define, legitimate and demand recognition
of a given group of people as a People or nation. What constitutes a nation
under international law is the following 5-part test: a) commonly-shared
land base for significant historical periods and recognized--by other
groups--as the distinct and commonly-shared land base of that group; b)
commonly-shared culture and language by members of the group; c)
commonly-shared economy by members of the group; d) commonly-shared
political institutions for determining representation, leadership and
membership of the group; e) a clear and clearly-expressed desire by the
vast majority of the group to constitute and remain as a nation.

On Taiwan there are groups such as the Gaoshan for example, that, although
significantly reduced in numbers and indeed almost extinct as a People, do
meet all the facts and tests for constituting--and being recognized as--a
nation. And, like any nation, and from the fundamental right of any nation
not to be exterminated or forcibly assimilated by--or to form--some
supposed broader nation, certain derivative rights of nations--necessary
but not sufficient conditions for the realization and protection of
fundamental rights of nations--follow:  a) right of recognition by other
nations and protections--along with responsibilities and limitations--of
international law; b) right of independence; c) right of
self-determination; d) right of sovereignty and recognition of sovereignty
by other nations; e) right of secession or disarticulation from larger
geographic land areas historically controlled by another and dominating
nation with which the land-base of the seceding nation is contiguous (under
the "Blue Water Doctrine", no longer operable, this right was recognized
under international law only if the land-base of the nation seeking
recognition and independence was separated by oceans or "Blue Water"--like
Portugal claiming Mozambique/Angola as "Provinces of Portugal" or France
claiming Algeria as a "Province" of France--and not contiguous with the
land-base of the imperial or dominating nation; this was merely an
accommodation or assertion by imperialist powers seeing the
implications--on their own contiguous land bases--of other nations seeking
independence, separation and recognition employing the very same facts and
international law that the imperial or dominating nations employ[ed] to
assert, legitimate and protect their own nationhood and survival); f) right
of reunification with other members of the nation that has been
historically divided or disenfranchised by other nations; g) right of
return of historical lands lost through imperial and other machinations
contrary to international law (no person or whole nation is supposed to
gain or be rewarded for illegal machinations in the past). g) right to form
and operate its own types of socioeconomic political systems and social
formations free from attempts at overthrow or impositions of foreign
systems and cultures.

But none of the basic facts or international law governing Taiwan as a
whole come close to fitting the case of, for example, certain Indigenous
nations on Taiwan. First of all, the ruling groups that formed the KMT--or
GMD--regime of Taiwan were not native to or Indigenous to Taiwan--they were
cowards and running renegades from the mainland who became
occupiers/dominators of lands and peoples to which they were not
indigenous.. Secondly, the fact that Taiwan, during various periods of
history, was alienated from broader China by foreign occupiers, does not,
and cannot, now separate Taiwan from broader China as almost all of the
historical and longstanding parts of China--as in the case of  many other
nations, even the the U.S.--were once occupied, divided or disarticulated
by other foreign powers and nations that have been forced to return the
illegally taken/held/controlled lands. Thirdly, the real indigenous groups
and nations on Taiwan have been largely diminished and exterminated not by
the government of the People's Republic of China, but by the illegal and
fascist renegades occupying Taiwan and protected by imperialist powers
seeking to fragment, disarticulate and destroy the traditional land base
and cultures of all of China (divide-and-rule). Fourthly, it is the basic
facts on the ground and international law--not simply acting like a nation
or doing what nations do as the Taiwan regime is now seeking to do to try
to gain recognition--and leverage its "credibility"--as a nation--that
defines, legitimates and demands recognition of a given group as a nation;
Fifthly, as the KMT or GMD regime of Taiwan was formed and continues to be
based upon various forms and doctrines of despotism, fascism and minority
rule, there is no basis to believe that the "vast majority" of the people
of Taiwan believe, or have asserted themselves to be, a separate People and
not a part of the broader nation of China (indeed for many years the
dominant elements of the KMT or GMD have long asserted a "one-China-claim"
with the patently bogus notion of being the "legitimate government" of all
of China, followed by the assertion, first, of a "two Chinas", and now the
assertion of  a separate "Taiwanese 'Nation' " as their arrogance and
patent fiction--being the sole representative of all of China and/or a "Two
Chinas--has failed to be recognized even by U.S. imperialism for which the
KMT/GMD have been nothing but whores, minions and outright agents; Sixthly,
under international law, no nation may deny to another nation, the very
same rights, principles, analogous facts or protections/responsibilities or
recognition under international law that it employs, and has employed, for
itself to assert and protect its own national recognition, security and
survival; this then legitimates the PRC claim of Taiwan being an integral
and unalienable part of China and vitiates any hypocritical claims by other
nations of a "Taiwanese Nation", "Two Chinas" or supposed "right of
secession" by Taiwanese.

For those who would maintain the patent and indefensible fiction of a "Two
Chinas" or a separate "Taiwan Nation", and who would deny the government of
China the right to do what it takes to reunify--as part of protecting the
existing and survival of the whole nation of China--Taiwan with all of
China,are simply acting objectively--if not subjectively--as agents and
apologists of U.S. imperialism and localized fascism/despotism in Taiwan.

Jim Craven

--

www.marxmail.org


_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism