Federalism: How Far The States Own Autonomy.
Analyzing what if the Issue of Taiwan was in consonance with US, not China.
Due to the recent Nancy Pelosi’s visit, Taiwan’s diplomacy was in flames again. Though it flames new for the month, it was the issue heated for years or can say decades. Over the top, again and again, China asserted that it was part of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). However, the island nation wanted the separation and to remain independent instead of merging under the hegemony of the People’s Republic of China. The article does not intend to make any side. However, it intended to present how strong the arguments of both sides are, that the position stands more political and less legal. The article wanted to present secession as to how a territory can be separated from its individual union. And argue that the countries that argue for Taiwan’s liberty do not even in themselves provide their regional parts that much autonomy to get separate. Think of the 11 secession moment that has failed in the US. Thus, the article presents the hypocrisy that the federal countries though wanted to preserve their unionism but appeal to others.
Limitation of this article — The article takes into consideration the general reference and comparison amongst the different political administrations. Different countries have different administrations and laws, so there cannot be an absolute comparison among all.
The article aims to present the hypocrisy of the USA federation as it talks of preserving the natural right of other nations without providing the sufficient right of autonomy to its states. Adding this it aims to present the strength on which the stands on which China stands.
Current Diplomacy
Taiwan is an island which is officially recognized as the Republic of China. However, political diplomacy has challenged this existence again and again and ambiguous the status. Taiwan was autonomous before the year 1600, yet there was no centralized government. In the late seventeenth century, China took over the government and controlled it for then two centuries. During the Initial Sino-Japanese War, Japan took control of Taiwan and established it as a colony.
After Japan lost the Second World War, Taiwan was once again under the hands of the Nationalist Chinese. However, there started an internal disturbance in the mainland People’s Republic of China created its dominance and led the Republic of China (ROC) soldiers to flee to Taiwan. It was for many years that the ROC asserted its authority over both Taiwan and the Chinese mainland. However, in 1990 Taiwan’s government abandoned this claim and led the politics to PRC as sole control.
UNDERSTANDING MORE
America’s Federal Structure and Secession.
It is unexpected that the constitutional drafter who assembled the 13 colonies and formed the constitution would think about its destruction and dissolution as well. And provides the provision for it. However, the constitution was not only the drafter’s will, but the US constitution is also living and possess the power to amend itself in accordance with the need. In the same light, though, secession was not mentioned in the US constitution, but a state can seek it through way of a constitutional amendment. Amendment to the constitution is mentioned under Article V of the Constitution. It says that an amendment can be proposed either by Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. And it was then rectified by three-fourths of the state legislature. Over the period of two and half centuries, there were only 27 amendments, which also were the issues on which each state had a unanimous rationale. However, when it came to the secession of any state, there was no unanimity. As secession of the blue state (California) means the rule of Republicans, and the secession of the red state ( like Texas) means the rule of democrats.
What exactly is secession? Secession, in general, refers to the voluntary withdrawal of one or more parts of a federation from the adjoining union. In the US, it refers to the separation of a state or any territory which forms an independent entity.
Every man preserved a natural right which is neither given nor granted by the government. Natural rights are universal, inherent, and unalienable since they are not governed by any specific culture’s or government’s laws or conventions. It is the natural right to establish a government for the purpose of mutual defence and welfare enhancement. And if they are willing and felt to be separated, they would not be compelled to stay.
US ideology acknowledges this right, and even it forms the basis of its support for the cause of Taiwan. However, this well-framed ideology is not deduced by its history when it comes to its throat of destruction or severance by the states from the United states of America.
TEXIT, it is the movement of Texas to demand secession from the US to create its own independent autonomy. This was the time of the American Civil war, and it was an important event to determine whether the states own that much discretion and autonomy to be separated at their own will or not. The matter of this TEXIT goes to the supreme court in the form of the Texas v. White case (1869), while noting that a successful secession may result via a revolution or the cooperation of the states, the Supreme Court declared unilateral secession to be unlawful.
CALEXIT, it is the moment for the secession of California. YesCalifornia is a committee that aspires in the year 2015 with lots of unsuccessful efforts being levied in acquiring the independence of California. However, the moment being unsuccessful, the committee ( formed concurrently with the moment) appealed for rights and liberty.
The Confederate States of America, a process and entity that the [northern] government of the United States refused to acknowledge, was formed when 11 Southern states proclaimed their secession from the United States individually in 1860 and 1861. This was the most serious effort at secession. When Union forces in the American Civil War defeated Confederate forces in 1865, the movement came to an end.
Many scholars and researchers that were against these moments felt them as more politically motivated than the actual cause. They felt that though these states could be classified amongst blue or red, they were more diverse than what the colour showcased. Like the states, the people were not stood that polarised and constituted supporters of the parties. Not even this, they felt the moment would not be assessed with the implication, which would be tumultuous to them.
So, in a nutshell, it was not too wrong to say that the biggest federation though respects natural rights but has very linear or narrow provisions when it comes to providing the right and the autonomy to states to secede from their own country.
Would the Terms of China and Taiwan be Comparable to the US?
The claims of China were not unrealistic. It was heavily based on the above historical sense and political scenario that in itself demystifies how China works as a principal body over Taiwan, impacting the country in every way. However, what so ever the past, the present situation is that Taiwan wanted to be segregated and let itself be independent of China. So, knowing this scenario many a time, Taiwan appealed for Secession from China. And in reality, the diplomacy encircles around the Secession law that China passed anti-secession law that leads China binding.
And it is not. The people’s Republic of China, on 14th March 2005, in the Third Session of the Tenth National People’s Congress, adopted Anti-Secession Law. Article 2 provides what it is and in what way it is:-
It says Taiwan is part of China. The state shall never allow the “Taiwan independence” secessionist forces to make Taiwan secede from China under any name or by any means.[1]
Chung (2016) asserts that “the PRC’s official ambiguity over the line’s meaning plays a significant role in perpetuating the dispute. No meaningful resolution can emerge if it is unclear what the PRC claims in the first place”.
Terms of China and Taiwan — Taiwan has never been a part of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). However, it was always of Republic of China (ROC)
China claims to be democratic, and it is but for the namesake, as mere tagging oneself as democratic does not make one democratic. Indeed, you must follow the principles to provide free and fair elections, fundamental rights and assurance against arbitrary ruling. All of which faded in the country. Thus, demanding the validity of secession is not something thinkable.
Way Ahead
Federalism is a democratic structure in which the power is shared between the centre and the correspondence territory. States were provided with equal power and required rights. However, when these rights started to clash with that of the centre and started to demand autonomy, they stood no parallel to the centre and were only subordinate to it. This was not only the story of the US but almost all democratic federations that compiled together, that they only wanted to grow and become more prominent. This is also the reason, besides the trade advantage, that most of the countries accept that Taiwan was a part of the PRC. The world has seen the diplomacy of Hong Kong and Macau and does not want the same trimming with the third territory. It was hoped that the leaders of the territory would be wiser enough to choose. Because it was only their choice that decides the future of the country, though whatever be the past and whatever is the present.
One of the Important questions that arose from this discussion is that
“Would the terms signed by the forefather and drafters binds us, even if they were against the present spirit and our choice?”
(Would be discussed in the next).
