The "One Country, Two Systems" Formula Fails China's Unification Efforts

Taiwan, a democracy with a strong national identity and a consolidated system of governance, has long been the target of China's 'one country, two systems' formula. However, this framework, rooted in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 and reinforced by Article 31 of China's Constitution, has proven to be a hollow promise. The experiences of Hong Kong and Macao, two Special Administrative Regions (SARs), demonstrate the fundamental impossibility of applying this model to Taiwan.

Hong Kong, where the 'one country, two systems' framework was first put into practice, has witnessed a steady erosion of autonomy since the 2003 anti-subversion bill protests. The 2014 Umbrella Movement and the 2019 protests against the extradition bill were met with repression, culminating in the imposition of the National Security Law and the silencing of civil society. Macao, on the other hand, has remained politically stable, with elites loyal to Beijing and little social unrest. However, its calm is misleading, as its judiciary defers readily to Beijing, and the political elite is dominated by interests dependent on the central government.

Taiwan has long rejected the 'one country, two systems' framework, emphasizing that its democratic institutions and way of life are incompatible with it. A poll released by Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council in April found that 84.4% of Taiwanese respondents oppose the 'one country, two systems' formula proposed by Beijing. The erosion of freedoms in Hong Kong has confirmed that unification on Beijing's terms means the end of Taiwan's democracy.

Key Takeaways:

• The 'one country, two systems' framework has proven to be a hollow promise, with Hong Kong and Macao serving as cautionary examples for Taiwan.
• The experiences of Hong Kong, where autonomy has eroded without challenge, and Macao, where compliance has been maintained through elite domination and weak democratic traditions, demonstrate the fundamental impossibility of applying this model to Taiwan.
• Taiwan, a consolidated democracy with independent courts, a competitive press, and a vibrant civil society, has drawn the lesson that 'one country, two systems' has no future there.
• The majority of Taiwanese identify as 'Taiwanese,' not 'Chinese,' and any settlement would require popular consent, making unification on Beijing's terms impossible.
• A fundamental transformation in how Beijing relates to autonomy, democracy, and the will of the people is necessary for a peaceful political settlement with Taiwan.

Statistics:

• 84.4% of Taiwanese respondents oppose the 'one country, two systems' formula proposed by Beijing, as found in a poll released by Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council in April.
• 50 years: the duration promised in the Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984 for Hong Kong to retain its own executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
• 2003: the year when the anti-subversion bill protests triggered half a million protesters in Hong Kong, exposing Beijing's fear of a politically assertive society.
• 2014: the year of the Umbrella Movement, demanding universal suffrage in Hong Kong.
• 2019: the year of the protests against the extradition bill in Hong Kong and the subsequent imposition of the National Security Law.

Sources:

• Sino-British Joint Declaration of 1984
• Article 31 of China's Constitution
• Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council poll (April)
• Macao's Basic Law
• Hong Kong's Basic Law