​ 
The Mainland-Taiwan Reunification issue is an internal affair left over by domestic military conflict between two political parties, CCP and KMT, resulting in today’s split of two governments, one in Mainland and one in Taiwan. This fact is recognized by all Chinese citizens, by the two current domestic governments in China and by the overwhelming majority of UN members. Each government is upholding a version of Constitution crafted after the beliefs of a free, independent and modern Republic nation desired by the Chinese people. The desired Republic and its constitution were earned by the Chinese people through their blood-shed revolution not only against a corrupt dynasty but also foreign interventions. The original Constitution contains the most salient principles that the Father of China, the revolution leader Dr. Sun Yat Sen, had prescribed in his famous book, Three Principles of the People, as the foundation of a ‘Republic’ China. Post WW II, the domestic conflict between two political parties, KMT and CCP, split China in two with the Mainland governed by CCP and Taiwan by KMT, each upholding a version of Constitution. The two versions have been revised to accommodate government services administered over Mainland and Taiwan, but the two constitutions however clearly proclaim China as one sovereign nation with her sovereignty defined over the land and seas including Mainland, Taiwan and South China Sea islands. Taiwan’s 1947 version of Constitution was revised in 2003 to allow the President to call for referendum in case of an imminent attack. The pro-independence political force in Taiwan (DPP Party) sought to inch towards independence through revision of Constitution but never could succeed. The Mainland’s original 1954 version of Constitution has been amended regulaly (1975, 1978, 1982, 1988, 1993, 1999, and 2004) as needed; its current version is the 12th revision since 1911 with a clear definition of autonomous regions and how different political systems may function under the One China governance and her Constitution.
 
In the modern world, any political governance must have and must obey a constitution to be legitimate in governing its people. Any political movement violating its Constitution only invites bloodshed such as a revolution (if the bloodshed led to success of overthrowing a regime and its constitution) or rebellion (if the bloodshed led to a failure and treason sentence under the Constitution).  The former situation requires people’s unyielding support willing to give their lives for the independence cause. The latter situation is often due to politicians’ ambition ignoring people’s ultimate welfare and desire of unity and peaceful governance under a Constitution. Take the most recent independence claim by Catalonia in Spain for example, we can understand what ‘Independence’ means in the modern world. Spain is a nation with a glorious long history evolved from an Imperial system to a nation governed by constitution. Spain’s Constitution defines its federation of states with some given semi-autonomous authority of governance.
 
Catalonia is a rich state but has no independent taxing authority according to Spanish Constitution and laws. Some people in Catalonia felt unfair in paying more to the central government than getting back in its state budget. Catalonia local government used a referendum to declare independence but received no recognition from the entire people of Spain nor from any major power of EU and the world. Catalonia did not have all its people supporting the independence claim, thus in the end, the Spanish central government applied its constitutional right to remove the President of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, and charged him with treason. He had fled to Brussels but being extradited back to Spain to stand trial.
 
Catalonia’s independence claim was based on selfish reason ignoring Spanish citizens’ constitutional duties to Spain, hence no justification for declaring independence or launching a revolution. Spain provides national security to Catalonia and has obligation to govern the entire nation fulfilling its constitutional duties. So it is not surprising that the independence issue in Catalonia is ultimately settled by the Constitution, apparently honored by the international community. Taiwan’s current ruling party, DPP, is pushing for independence but both Taiwan’s Constitution (ROC) and Mainland’s Constitution (PRC) prohibit such a split. Even if the entire people on the Taiwan island want to launch a revolution sacrificing blood-shed, the independence claim would fail. Therefore, the sensible political solution is to pursue reunification according to Constitution, Both ROC and PRC version of Constitution have no discrepancy in defining one China and her sovereignty. The political parties and politicians on both sides must accept this resolution according to constitution.
 
The two Constitutions prescribe a common definition of a republic nation belonging to its people and its government’s responsibility protecting and safeguarding its people’s rights, freedom and duties. Although the two Constitutions describe two somewhat different governmental structure but their spirit of governance are identical, seeking security, freedom and economic welfare for the people, opposing any discrimination against any group in their people and defending against any foreign aggression. In the PRC version, it explicitly states (Article 28), the State must maintain public order and suppress treasonable and other criminal activities endangering the State and its people. It further states in Article 31, the State may establish special administrative regions (e.g. Hong Kong and Macao) and in Article 52-54, the duty of citizens to safeguard the unity of the country and the unity of all its nationalities, to abide Constitution and laws...) and to safeguard the security, honor, interests of motherland (and not commit any crime violating the above). Whereas the ROC Constitution states in Article 138, defense forces shall be above personal, regional, and party affiliations, shall be loyal to the State and shall protect the people and in Article 139, no political party and no individual shall make use of armed forces as an instrument in the struggle for political power. 
 
Based on the above constitutional constraints, obviously the Mainland-Taiwan reunification issue should better be resolved peacefully according to the Constitution. The pro-independence political faction in Taiwan in the past several decades has been pushing towards the red line prescribed by the constitutions. It is acceptable to form opposition political parties but it is not acceptable to build forces (such as the military forces organized by Taiwan Democratic Nation). The DDP’s persistent effort in whitewashing history to brain-wash the young generations may be interpreted as criminal acts to destroy the unity of the country and destruction of the security, honor and interests of the country, both treasonable activities. Thus Lee Deng Hui, Chen shui bian and current President Tsai Ying Wen could be brought to charges according to the Constitution.
 
Similar to Catalonia, Taiwan cannot declare independence under any circumstances even with a referendum. If Taiwan declared independence, the PRC government could remove the Taiwan government according to the Constitution, by force if necessary. The international community would stand by PRC’s position since it is justified by both Constitutions. Since China allows different political systems to function under One China policy, Taiwan has no excuse to demand independence, especially with 193 States recognizing PRC and only 19 UN members recognizing ROC. The international community would overwhelmingly side with PRC. 
 
The new Taiwan President, Tsai Ying Wen, has deliberately retreated from recognizing One China policy to a fuzzy “Maintaining Status Quo” position, wishfully hoping that the U.S. and Japan will come to Taiwan’s defense in the event that China pushes reunification by force. Tsai is treading a dangerous line by conducting a pro-independence policy under the cover of ‘Maintaining Status Quo’. The ‘Justice’ is clearly on the PRC side since PRC has given Taiwan a friendly most favorable trade status for decades to promote peaceful reunification under ‘the one nation two systems’ doctrine. In politics, one can not fool all the people all the time, if Tsai would not reign back her hypocritical “Maintaining Status Quo” Policy and work towards a peaceful reunification beneficial to all Chinese people, Tsai’s political future would be far worse than Carles Puigdemont of Spain.
 
Ifay Chang. Ph.D. Producer/Host, Community Education - Scrammble Game Show, Weekly TV Columnist, www.us-chinaforum.org . Trustee, Somers Central School District.
 

 
Germany is an advanced democratic nation and is ever stronger since West Germany and East Germany were united. Chancellor Merkel represents both the Christian democratic Union (CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU). They will not compete in the federal election according to their mutual agreement since they share similar ideology. Since CDU and CSU didnot win more than 50% of the parliament seats of last election, they must unite with other parties to organize a coalition government. Since 2013, CDU/CSU has cooperated with the Socialdemocratic Party of Deutchlands (SPD) to form a ruling government governing the entire people. Unlike many other pseudo democratic systems, the coalition governments in Germany are very stable and effective owing to the fact that Germans are very disciplined, respectful to the fundamental principle of democracy – Majority Rules and generally quite knowledgeable in political issues.
 
Merkel has served three terms as Chancellor. Her skill and ability in organizing and managing a coalition government is fairly recognized by the German people; as a leader she is well respected by the leaders in the international community including the powerful nations, China, the U.S., Russia and UK. In German elections, the polls are generally very stable and accurate, however, in this year, the refugee and immigration issue has created a crisis in Germany which causes a few percentage point of swing in the poll and the election. Merkel’s Union Faction and SPD generally accept refugees and have more moderate attitudes towards immigration laws. However, a new party, called “Alternative for Germany” (AFD), established in 2013 has emerged as the strongest opposition party. The AFD party positioned itself as a center-to-right focusing on the middle class and recruiting highly educated people thus earned a nickname as professors’ party. In 2013, AFD only won 4.7% of the votes lower than the required 5% to earn any parliament seat, but in 2014 it won 7.4% and this year, it claimed a big victory to have won 13% as the third winner next to CDU/CSU (33%) and SPD (20.5%).
 
The rise of AFD is not a smooth one, highly influenced by current events. The party has had a split and its party platform has evolved from center-to-right to far-right. Its political platform may still change but for now its major positions are: advocating direct vote system, dissolving or splitting European Union, anti-immigration, opposing same-sex marriage, promoting German Identity, denying climate change policy and pushing privatizing social benefit system and government owned enterprises. On the refugee issue, AFD calls for zero immigration, closing borders and opposing family reunion for refugees, a clear far-right position in contrast to Merkel’s mainstream moderate policies.  In September 25th 2017 election, CDU/CSU received only 33% votes, the lowest since 1949. Her partner SPD also received its lowest score (20.5%) since post-WW II. SPD’s leader, Martin Schulz, served as the President of EU Parliament, is a well known figure in Germany, so his loss to AFD is significant. There is no question that the 2017 election result will have a big impact to Merkel and Germany. Schulz already announced that SPD will be the opposition party not joining CDU/CSU to form the “Grand’ Coalition. Merkel would have to choose two small parties, Free Democratic Party (FDP) and Green party to form a ‘Jamaica’ coalition (so named because the colors of three partners are black, yellow and green, the same as the color of Jamaican national flag). The Jamaica coalition will have less parliament seats than the Grand coalition.  Merkel has promised to form the new government by Christmas. We expect she will make it to show her ability.
 
The rise of the right in Germany represented by AFD has its traces in global changes – signs of nationalism and setback on globalization. This was also observable in the 2016 Presidential Election of the U.S. Ironically, AFD used the slogan “Lock her up” against Merkel, the phrase Trump used against Hillary Clinton. The speed of propagation of propaganda is extremely fast in the age of Internet. Thus, Trump’s success in creating a movement in the U.S. helped some of that ‘conservative right’ to propagate to Europe. However, in the Internet age, it is also possible that fast come will fast go. The Trump Administration is presumably acting on a mandate but the mandate was never that clear just like the ‘left’ and ‘right’ are no longer  clear or black and white as several decades ago. Advocating competition and freedom used to be simply ‘right’ and promoting equality and socialism being ‘left’, but today, we see capitalist countries adopting socialistic programs; when programs bankrupt financially, they turn back to privatization and competition. On the other hand, socialist countries sometimes adopt capitalistic economic development and financial policies; when wealth gap widens too much, they turn back to socialism to redistribute wealth. So the ‘right’ and ‘left’ are co-mingled in many complex patterns varying in time depending on how the situation is evolving and who (leaders) are trying to fix the situation. Just in EU alone, they are plenty of such kinds of examples.
 
Since WW II, Germany has come a long way to reestablish itself as a major economy of the world with a stable and effective government strengthened by the reunification of the West and East Germany. In the last couple of decades, we see the rise of other new powers such as China who experimented through a clear left political system to a self-defined ‘left and right’ co-mingled China system. Her success in economic development and many areas in science and technology, especially in agriculture, manufacturing, construction and transportation even in space and communication engineering have raised challenges in the capitalist camp led by the U.S. While the U.S. seemingly makes a turnabout from globalization, China is promoting globalization as the engine for achieving world prosperity. It is not surprising that UK adopts Brexit and AFD rises in Germany. It is clearly a challenging time for country leaders. But judging on Merkel’s ability and past performance and German people’s patriotism, I bet Germany will come out alright.
 
Germany as a re-unified country with a stable political system is a good example for others to study, especially Taiwan. Taiwan can draw a lesson from Germany’s reunification; unification of the West and East strengthened the united Germany because German people all identify with one nation. Coalition governments work so long people have the wisdom to elect capable leaders. Taiwan needs to learn how to form coalition government to serve the people. Martin Schulz not to join the coalition to take a government position is thinking he can better serve the country to be on the opposition perhaps moderating AFD. Parties can have different political platforms but they must agree they ultimately serve the people under the principle of majority rules. Opinion polls are like pulse measurements checking people’s health.  German opinion polls never have wide swings but Taiwan’s political polls are all over the place which shows that the polls are dishonest and the people are really sick. No matter how the world changes, the Germans’ patriotism does not change, so Germany will remain strong. Taiwan’s people must think hard on what is Taiwan’s real identity? What does reunification mean under patriotism? (A united West and East Germany strengthens and prospers, so will China and Taiwan.) What does independence mean under artificial division of the people and denial of people’s historical identity? (East Germany would be struggling and become a third world economy, so would Taiwan).
 
Taiwan’s people must wise up to get rid of the separatists and elect a capable patriotic leader to move to reunification.
                    

​

​ 
Abstract
 
Hong Kong had a history as a colony ruled by the British Empire for 155 years. As a Pearl of Asia, Hong Kong was reluctantly returned to China in 1997. Not like Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan have no sane reasons for pushing for Independence. The Independence push comes from foreign influence with sour grape mentality. The Chinese people worldwide, HK, Taiwan even in Singapore should understand the meaning of Independence and who wants to push for it! 
 
=====================================================================
 
No one would argue that the people in Hong Kong (HK), a vibrant metropolitan city with super majority being immigrants from China are Chinese. The HK dialect originated from South China is still prevalent today that signifies Chinese are conservative, traditional and believing in ancestry, culture and history. When the Qing Dynasty was weak and corrupt, she was no match to the British Empire's navy and guns. HK was ceded to Britain after China lost in the first Opium War (1841-1842), a war of disgrace.  From Chinese citizens' nationalistic point of view the defeat brought the unequal Treaty of Nanking. Opium War was a disgrace to human civilization as well. The Chinese government had all the rights to protect her people from the British merchants forcing opium trade to China, but there was no international justice nor human rights but only gun boat power then. The Consequence of opium addiction is devastating, destruction of health, loss of will power and a merciless way of leading a person to kill him or herself or commit murder for a last smoke of opium.
 
Opium war also led other nations to invade China for territory and financial gains, including the Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895) resulting in China ceding Taiwan to Japan (Makwan Treaty, another disgraceful unequal treaty). Japan with her ambition to conquer China launched an all-out pre-meditated war in 1937. The Japanese Imperial Army committed the Nanking Massacre, a war crime more atrocious than holocaust. Nanking Massacre began in December 13, 1937, in six weeks the Japanese Imperial Army slaughtered 300,000 people, looted properties and burned the Nanking City. It is a sad history that the Chinese people wish to forget and never to happen again.  But Japan till today still denies it ever happened. Some would say Japan was too ashamed to admit it and some would say the Japanese people were too scared of revenge to admit such cruelest war crime.  But the sad hidden truth was that the Japanese simply wanted to keep the spirit of Japanese Imperialism alive. This angers the Chinese and worries all Asians, even some US citizens whose ancestors experienced the cruelty of the Japanese soldiers during WW II.
 
Since 1842, HK was ceded (Treaty of Nanking) to the British Empire which then ruled HK as a colony, treating HK people as inferior second class citizens. The governor of HK was appointed by the British Crown enjoying absolute authority answering only to the Crown. When the Chinese Revolution toppled Qing Dynasty and established Republic of China (ROC) in 1911, the United Kingdom held on HK with no intention of returning it to China. Japan tried to follow the British Colony model to rule Taiwan but found out that the Japanese could be easily absorbed by Chinese culture like many invaders in China in the past history. Japan started her own model, forcing Chinese to learn and use the Japanese language, change to Japanese names and wear Japanese clothes. Japan wanted to absorb the Chinese into Japanese culture but as a second class citizen. When Japan was defeated ending WW II; Japan returned Taiwan and all other occupied territories to China. The fifty years of Japanese rule in Taiwan left some tragic mark of Japanese cruelty, slaughtering the aborigines and many who did not fully cooperated in the 'Japanization' program. Some Japanese and their descendants stayed back in Taiwan after WW II ended.
 
The United Kingdom did not return HK to China taking advantage of China's internal power struggle between KuoMingTang (KMT) and Chinese Communist Party (CCP). In 1949, the CCP united the entire Mainland and established People's Republic of China (PRC) and the KMT retreated to Taiwan as Republic of China (ROC). Both PRC and ROC claim to be the official representative of the entire China with a vow to unite Mainland and Taiwan as well as to recover all territories lost by previous unequal treaties mentioned above. However, after WW II, HK remained under the control of the United Kingdom despite of hundreds of thousands more mainlanders moved to HK during the 1940's and 1950's. The HK government then treated the newcomers as unwelcome refugees giving little assistance. The Chinese in HK struggled and helped themselves; some eventually moved to Taiwan and some returned to Mainland China.
 
The Chinese are peace loving people. They long for law and order and opportunity for making a peaceful living. When HK or Taiwan was ceded to foreign power, the people's resistance was quickly put down by military force. They could only blame their weak mother land and wished for their return with strength. The British had practiced colonialism and skillfully maintained law and order in HK but granting no political freedom or rights to the HK people. Japan failed in her 'Japanization' program in Taiwan but Japanese genes seemed to have a 'never giving up a goal' trait. Today Japan is still pursuing ‘Japanizing Taiwan’ by supporting pro-Japan politicians in Taiwan to push for independence with a goal to absorb Taiwan as she is doing to Okinawa. When a Taiwan middle school celebrated its 68th anniversary, a bunch of alumni went back from the U.S. to celebrate their 50th graduation anniversary (the middle school is Fuzon recovered from Japan after WW II and renamed in 1947). So many Japanese 'alumni' in their 80’s came to attend the celebration (some only attended the middle school a year or two). The travel expenses of the Japanese “alumni’ were funded by some Japanese business organization, would you believe such generosity with no political motives?
 
HK was finally returned to China by U.K. In 1997 amusingly with a stipulation that HK would remain somewhat autonomous for 50 years, except leaving defense and foreign diplomacy to be the responsibility of the Chinese Central Government. China confidently agreed and kept her promise even strengthened her constitution to permit China to have multiple political systems to co-function in China – a reasonable foundation to support a united China of 56 races cultivated as Chinese people. HK now enjoys far more political freedom and rights than when she was a colony (1842-1997). The Chinese people living in HK tolerated the British rule and there were no political movement for Independence then. Why is there an independence movement today after  20 peaceful years after the returning to an improving and growing China, pushed by young people who had just grown up from babies to adults? Do they understand the meaning of independence comes with its responsibility of self-defense? Why would HK people want to give up her high per capita income to spend on military defense by being an enemy of her mother country? Why?
 
Singapore as a city country populated with Chinese in majority, Malay, Indians and Indonesians was forced to declare independence after being expelled by the Malay Federation. Singapore now has to maintain a significant defense and rely on a U.S. Alliance for security since she is surrounded by Muslim countries. Why does HK, a Chinese populated city, want to push for independence from China, her only neighbor? China not only did not discriminate against HK but enriched HK economic growth? HK people enjoys just as much if not more political freedom than Singaporeans do because Singapore has a political baggage due to her Malay and Indian constituents. So, who wants HK people to push for Independence to become an enemy of her mother country? A similar logical question can be asked about the Taiwan people. But the answer is the same: Not citizens but foreign countries really want HK and Taiwan to push for Independence, to create chaos, to weaken China and to destroy HK and Taiwan’s economy.
 
The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/21/hong-kong-china-authoritarian-democracy-one-country-two-systems) published a paper by Howard W French, Is it too late to save Hong Kong from Beijing’s authoritarian grasp? The article has a sour grape tone implying that the tremendous local pride when HK was returned to China in 1997 was so quickly disappeared in one generation. But the Guardian article’s title and the news items attributed to authoritarian grasp therein really supported the answer above. The Independence push comes from foreign influence but it will not succeed. The Chinese people worldwide, HK, Taiwan even in Singapore now should understand the meaning of Independence and who wants to push for it!