Editing Taiwan independence movement (section)

== Positions ==
The questions of independence and the island's relationship to mainland China are complex and inspire very strong emotions among [[Taiwanese people]]. There are some who continue to maintain the KMT's position, which states that the ROC is the sole legitimate government for ''all'' of China (of which they consider Taiwan to be a part), and that the aim of the government should be eventual unification of the mainland and Taiwan under the rule of the ROC. Some argue that Taiwan has been, and should continue to be, completely independent from China and should become a Taiwanese state with a distinct name. Then, there are numerous positions running the entire spectrum between these two extremes, as well as differing opinions on how best to manage either situation should it ever be realized.

On 25 October 2004, in Beijing, the [[U.S. Secretary of State]] [[Colin Powell]] said Taiwan is "not sovereign," provoking strong comments from both the Pan-Green and Pan-Blue coalitions – but for very different reasons. From the DPP's side, President Chen declared that "Taiwan is definitely a sovereign, independent country, a great country that absolutely does not belong to the People's Republic of China". The TSU ([[Taiwan Solidarity Union]]) criticized Powell, and questioned why the US sold weapons to Taiwan if it were not a sovereign state. From the KMT, then Chairman [[Ma Ying-jeou]] announced, "the Republic of China has been a sovereign state ever since it was formed <nowiki>[</nowiki>in 1912<nowiki>]</nowiki>." The pro-unification PFP Party Chairman, [[James Soong]], called it "Taiwan's biggest failure in diplomacy."<ref>{{cite web
|url = http://www.pfp.org.tw/news/news_detail.php?id=732&p=960&j=2
|title = The appropriate interpretation of Powell's statement
|publisher = People First Official Website
|language = zh
|access-date = 10 May 2008
|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110609111502/http://www.pfp.org.tw/news/news_detail.php?id=732&p=960&j=2
|archive-date = 9 June 2011
|url-status = live
}}</ref>

=== Support for independence ===
[[File:Parade of Taiwan independence.jpg|thumb|upright=1.1|Parade of Taiwan independence supporters]]
{{See also|Pro-Taiwanese sentiment}}
The first view considers the move for Taiwan independence as a [[Taiwanese nationalism|nationalist]] movement. Historically, this was the view of such pro-independence groups as the [[Tangwai movement]] (which later grew into the [[Democratic Progressive Party]]) who argued that the ROC under the [[Kuomintang]] had been a "foreign regime" forcibly imposed on Taiwan. Since the 1990s, supporters of Taiwan independence no longer actively make this argument. Instead, the argument has been that, in order to survive the growing power of the PRC, Taiwan must view itself as a separate and distinct entity from "China."  Such a change in view involves: 
* removing the name of "China" from official and unofficial items in Taiwan,
* changes in history books, which now portrays Taiwan as a central entity,
* promoting the use of [[Taiwanese Minnan|Hokkien Language]] in the government and in the education system, 
* reducing economic and cultural links with mainland China,
* opposing [[Chinese unification]] regardless of [[Democracy in China|mainland China being a democracy]] and
* promoting the general thinking that Taiwan is a separate entity. 

The goal of this movement is the eventual creation of a country where China is a ''foreign'' entity, and Taiwan is an internationally recognized ''country'' separate from any concept of "China." The proposed "Republic of Taiwan" will exclude areas such as Quemoy and Matsu off the coast of Fujian, and some of the islands in the South China Sea ([[Taiping Island]], [[Pratas Island]], [[Zhongzhou Reef]]), which historically were not part of Taiwan. Some supporters of Taiwan independence argue that the [[Treaty of San Francisco]] justifies Taiwan independence by not explicitly granting Taiwan to either the ROC or the PRC, even though neither the PRC nor the ROC government accepts such legal justification. It is also thought that if formal independence were declared, Taiwan's foreign policies would lean further towards [[Japan]] and the [[United States]], and the desirable option of [[United Nations Trusteeship Council]] is also considered.<ref>{{cite web
| author = United Nations
| title = UN Trusteeship Council
| publisher = United Nations
| url = https://www.un.org/en/about-us/trusteeship-council
| date = 1999-10-25
| accessdate = 2023-07-26
| quote = The UN Charter established the Trusteeship Council as one of the main organs of the United Nations, and assigned to it the task of supervising the administration of Trust Territories placed under the International Trusteeship System. The Trusteeship Council suspended its operations on 1 November 1994, a month after the independence of Palau, the last remaining United Nations trust territory.
| archive-date = 22 March 2022
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220322132852/https://www.un.org/en/about-us/trusteeship-council
| url-status = live
}}</ref>

The [[Taiwan Independence Party]] won a single seat in the [[Legislative Yuan]] in the 1998 legislative election. The [[Taiwan Solidarity Union]] was formed in 2001, and is also supportive of independence. Though it gained more legislative support than TAIP in elections, the TSU's legislative representation has dropped over time. In 2018, political parties and organizations demanding a referendum on Taiwan's independence formed an alliance to further their objective. The [[Formosa Alliance]] was established on 7 April 2018, prompted by a sense of crisis in the face of growing pressure from China for unification. The alliance wanted to hold a referendum on Taiwan's independence in April 2019, and change the island's name from the "Republic of China" to "Taiwan," and apply for membership in the [[United Nations]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Pro-independence-forces-in-Taiwan-align-to-push-referendum|title=Pro-independence forces in Taiwan align to push referendum|website=Nikkei Asian Review|access-date=6 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180506173959/https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Pro-independence-forces-in-Taiwan-align-to-push-referendum|archive-date=6 May 2018|url-status=live}}</ref> In August 2019, another party supportive of independence, the [[Taiwan Action Party Alliance]] was founded.

=== Support for status quo ===
{{See also|Huadu (Taiwan)}}
A second view is that Taiwan is already an independent nation with the official name "Republic of China," which has been independent (i.e. de facto separate from mainland China/de jure separate from PRC) since the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949, when the ROC lost control of mainland China, with only Taiwan (including the [[Penghu]] islands), [[Kinmen]] (Quemoy), the [[Matsu Islands]] off the coast of [[Fujian Province]], and some of the [[South China Sea Islands|islands in the South China Sea]] remaining under its administration.<ref>{{Cite web |title=While Pledging to Defend Taiwan from China, Biden Shifted on Taiwan Independence. Here's Why That Matters. |url=https://www.cfr.org/blog/while-pledging-defend-taiwan-china-biden-shifted-taiwan-independence-heres-why-matters |access-date=2024-02-05 |website=Council on Foreign Relations |language=en |archive-date=5 February 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240205031449/https://www.cfr.org/blog/while-pledging-defend-taiwan-china-biden-shifted-taiwan-independence-heres-why-matters |url-status=live }}</ref> Although previously no major political faction adopted this pro-[[status quo]] viewpoint, because it is a "compromise" in face of PRC threats and American warnings against a unilateral declaration of independence, the DPP combined it with their traditional belief to form their latest official policy. This viewpoint has not been adopted by more radical groups such as the [[Taiwan Solidarity Union]], which favor only the third view described above and are in favor of a Republic or State of Taiwan.  In addition, many members of the Pan-Blue Coalition are rather suspicious of this view, fearing that adopting this definition of Taiwan independence is merely an insincere stealth tactical effort to advance [[desinicization]] and the third view of Taiwan independence.  As a result, supporters of Pan-Blue tend to make a clear distinction between Taiwan ''independence'' and Taiwan ''sovereignty'', while supporters of Pan-Green tend to try to blur the distinction between the two.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-07-28 |title=Taiwanese Preference for Status Quo Remains Constant Even as Views Harden |url=https://globaltaiwan.org/2021/07/taiwanese-preference-for-status-quo-remains-constant-even-as-views-harden/ |access-date=2024-02-05 |website=Global Taiwan Institute |language=en-US |archive-date=5 February 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240205031449/https://globaltaiwan.org/2021/07/taiwanese-preference-for-status-quo-remains-constant-even-as-views-harden/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

Most Taiwanese and political parties of the ROC support the [[status quo]], and recognize that this is [[de facto]] independence through sovereign self-rule.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-11-21 |title=Majority support 'status quo,' poll shows – Taipei Times |url=https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2021/11/21/2003768230 |access-date=2024-02-05 |website=www.taipeitimes.com |archive-date=5 February 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240205031450/https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2021/11/21/2003768230 |url-status=live }}</ref> Even among those who believe Taiwan is and should remain independent, the threat of war from PRC softens their approach, and they tend to support maintaining the status quo rather than pursuing an ideological path that could result in war with the PRC. When President [[Lee Teng-hui]] put forth the two-states policy, he received 80% support. A similar situation arose when President [[Chen Shui-bian]] declared that there was "[[One Country on Each Side|one country on each side]]" of the Taiwan Strait. To this day, the parties disagree, sometimes bitterly, on such things as territory, name (R.O.C. or Taiwan), future policies, and interpretations of history. The Pan-Blue Coalition and the PRC believe that [[Lee Teng-hui]] and [[Chen Shui-bian]] are intent on publicly promoting a moderate form of Taiwan independence in order to advance secretly deeper forms of Taiwan independence, and that they intend to use popular support on Taiwan for political separation to advance notions of cultural and economic separation.

=== Opposition to independence ===
{{See also|Chinese unification|Anti-Secession Law}}
[[File:Anti-Taiwan independence movement protesters in Washington DC 20051020.jpg|thumbnail|250x250px|Anti-Taiwan independence protesters in [[Washington, D.C.]] during Lee Teng-hui's visit in 2005]]
[[File:2023 joint anti-Taiwan independence and anti-intervention operation.png|thumb|250x250px|In 2023, in Taiwan, a joint anti-Taiwan independence and [[Non-interventionism|anti-intervention]] protest against [[Lai Ching-te|William Lai Ching‑te]]]]
The third view, put forward by the government of the PRC and Nationalists of the KMT, defines Taiwan independence as "splitting Taiwan from China, causing division of the nation and the people." What PRC claims by this statement is somewhat ambiguous according to supporters of Taiwanese independence, as some statements by the PRC seem to identify China solely and uncompromisingly with the PRC. Others propose a broader and more flexible definition suggesting that both [[mainland China]] and Taiwan are parts that form one cultural and geographic entity, although divided politically as a vestige of the [[Chinese Civil War]]. 

The KMT and the broader Pan-Blue coalition believe that China should be unified under the Republic of China (ROC) and opposes any attempts in [[De-Sinicization|de-sinicization]] that erases any links with China. Since 2016, divisions have emerged in the coalition following electoral defeats and widespread sentiments among the Taiwanese electorate that rejects any form of unification, with pro-Beijing elements beginning to infiltrate the ranks of the coalition through the [[United front in Taiwan|united front]] that advocate unification under the PRC.<ref>https://www.taiwangazette.org/news/2018/10/25/they-used-to-be-anti-communist-but-now-they-play-to-beijings-tune</ref>     

The PRC considers itself the sole legitimate government of all China, and the ROC to be a defunct entity replaced in the [[Chinese Communist Revolution|Communist revolution that succeeded in 194]]9. Therefore, assertions that the ROC is a sovereign state are construed as support for Taiwan independence, so are proposals to change the name of the ROC. Such a name change is met with even more disapproval since it rejects Taiwan as part of the [[greater China]] entity (as one side of a still-unresolved Chinese civil war). The ROC used to be recognized by the UN as the sole legal government of China until 1971. In that year, the [[UN General Assembly Resolution 2758|UN Resolution 2758]] was passed, and the PRC became recognized as the legal government of China by the UN. [[Chinese nationalism|Chinese nationalists]] have called the Taiwan independence movement and its supporters to be ''[[hanjian]]'' (traitors).{{cn|date=May 2024}}

The Chinese Communist Party classifies Taiwan independence activists as one of the [[Five Poisons]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Callick |first=Rowan |date=March 11, 2007 |title=China's great firewall |url=https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnation%2Finquirer%2Fchinas-great-firewall%2Fnews-story%2Fbf7df5dafcf4af8968ffd56cd0688460&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&nk=251a57fdace5b075f2cf7af36f498b32-1737436718 |url-status=live |access-date=May 21, 2024 |website=[[The Australian]] |archive-date=28 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210928071818/https://amp.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/chinas-great-firewall/news-story/bf7df5dafcf4af8968ffd56cd0688460 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last1=Hoffman |first1=Samantha |last2=Mattis |first2=Peter |date=18 July 2016 |title=Managing the Power Within: China's State Security Commission |url=http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/managing-the-power-within-chinas-state-security-commission/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160719130204/http://warontherocks.com/2016/07/managing-the-power-within-chinas-state-security-commission/ |archive-date=19 July 2016 |access-date=22 July 2016 |website=War on the Rocks}}</ref> In 2005, the [[10th National People's Congress]] passed the [[Anti-Secession Law]] authorizing military force for unification.<ref>{{cite web |last=Robinson |first=Dan |date=16 March 2005 |title=US House Criticizes China Bill on Taiwan Secession |url=http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-03-16-voa60.cfm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050402022813/http://voanews.com/english/2005-03-16-voa60.cfm |archive-date=2005-04-02 |access-date=2005-03-17 |website=[[Voice of America]]}}</ref> In 2024, the Chinese government issued a directive to the courts stating that "diehard" independence supporters could be [[Trial in absentia|tried in absentia]] with [[Capital punishment in China|capital punishment]] imposed.<ref>{{Cite news |date=June 21, 2024 |title=China threatens death penalty for 'diehard' Taiwan separatists |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-issues-guidelines-criminal-punishment-diehard-taiwan-separatists-2024-06-21/ |access-date=June 22, 2024 |work=[[Reuters]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=June 21, 2024 |title=China threatens death penalty for supporters of Taiwan independence |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/taiwan-independence-06212024151620.html |access-date=June 22, 2024 |work=[[Radio Free Asia]]}}</ref>