TAICHUNG (Taiwan News) — Only 1.2% of Taiwanese surveyed want “unification as soon as possible” with China, according to polling by National Chengchi University (NCCU), while it's likely a higher percentage of people would rather want to be in a tragic blimp accident as soon as possible.
NCCU also found 2.7% identified themselves as solely “Chinese” (中國人), so more than half of these people do not want to be annexed by China any time soon. It’s worth noting that the vast majority of that 2.7% were probably actually born in China, either prior to the 1949 exodus of the KMT from China, or more recently as an immigrant spouse of a Taiwanese.
In other words, almost everyone wants Taiwan to be independent in one form or another, at least for now. There is, however, a lot of nuance in what “independence” means to individual Taiwanese.
Broadly speaking, they are divided into two camps: “Taiwan” independence (台獨, taidu) and “Republic of China (ROC)” independence (華獨, huadu). The basic difference between the two is between renaming the country Taiwan or maintaining Taiwan as an independent nation under the ROC name and maintaining the constitution.
Those who want to “declare independence as soon as possible” only make up 4.6% of the population according to NCCU. However, in a more stripped-down poll by the Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation (TPOF, 台灣民意基金會) with only three choices and no nuanced timeline questions, 50% chose independence, 11.8% unification and 25.7% maintain the status quo.
Then there is a My Formosa (美麗島電子報) poll showing that 75.9% of respondents believe that maintaining the status quo already equates to independence (de facto independence) and therefore there is no need to change the country's name in the constitution. It also showed that 14.4% of respondents believe that only through amending the constitution can Taiwan truly be independent (de jure independence).
TPOF polling tends to produce dramatic results, but the NCCU and My Formosa numbers come to similar conclusions. If the NCCU “maintain status quo, decide at a later date” at 28.7%, “maintain status quo indefinitely” at 28.5% and “maintain status quo, move towards independence” at 25.4% are added together, that reaches 82.6%, not so far off My Formosa’s 75.9% “already independent.”
“Reunification” supporters and Ma administration
In the NCCU poll, 6% of the population wants to “maintain status quo, move towards unification” with China. What that 6% is saying is that they want to remain independent for now. Likely these people either harbor notions of a “great Chinese nation,” are hopeful China will move toward democracy, covet economic benefit or some combination of those — but still do not want unification to happen soon.
“Unification as soon as possible” types tend to support smaller parties like the New Party (NP), but some also have a home in the Kuomintang (KMT). Among the top figures in the party who likely fall into this category are former party chair and presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and Sun Yat Sen School President Chang Ya-chung (張亞中), who is regularly quoted in CCP mouthpieces and has just declared he will be a candidate in the KMT’s presidential primary.
“Status quo, move towards unification” supporters are almost certainly KMT. The most prominent figure of this type is former President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who was born in Hong Kong (or some say Shenzhen) to a family fleeing the Chinese Civil War.
Ma’s administration worked to lay the groundwork for an eventual “reunification” with China by opening up direct links, promoting social and cultural exchanges, opening up trade in goods and shrinking military spending — though he was thwarted in his attempts to open up trade in services and to “re-sinicize” Taiwan’s history books. Foxconn (Hon Hai) founder and potential presidential candidate Terry Gou (郭台銘), who is from a 49er family born in 1950 right after his family fled China, makes pilgrimages to his ancestral village in China and has extensive investments there.
Pan-green or pan-blue middle
Those who hope for “maintain status quo, decide at a later date” are a bit harder to parse because it’s unclear what they hope the decision will be, or even if they have a preference at all. Perhaps they think that perhaps the situation with China will be different one day and either unifying with China, or changing the name of the country, will be options — but which one are they thinking of? Do they think both are acceptable options? Hard to say.
Supporters of “maintain status quo indefinitely” may have several reasons for supporting this. Some, more likely the KMT camp, are genuinely supportive of the ROC, but also have no interest in ever being a part of China.
Light blue former KMT Chair Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) might fall in this category judging by his attempts to get the KMT to drop the 1992 Consensus, which in the KMT’s view is “there is one China, each side with different definitions.” While Chiang was party chair a survey was released that showed over 80% of KMT members supported the 1992 Consensus, though it did not explore why, as reasons could range from “it is helpful to keep dialogue open with China,” “it keeps the peace with China,” out of business concerns or because they genuinely believe in “one China.”
There are probably “indefinitely” supporters on the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) side as well. Likely because they are pessimistic that China would ever renounce the use of force if the government dropped the ROC name in favor of Taiwan.
“Maintain status quo, move towards independence” and President Tsai
“Maintain status quo, move towards independence” types are almost certainly pan-green, supporting the DPP or perhaps the New Power Party (NPP). For a time in the early 1990s, the DPP campaigned on changing the country’s name and constitution, but after getting trounced in the polls, in 1999 the party adopted the line that Taiwan was an independent country with the name Republic of China.
The most famous supporter of this track is President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), whose administration on this is the mirror opposite of Ma Ying-jeou’s. Under her administration, economic, cultural and social ties with China have dropped off dramatically, businesses have been encouraged to return to Taiwan or relocate out of China and local cultures and languages boosted and embraced.
Under Tsai, she has used the formula “Republic of China, Taiwan” and has dated it to starting in 1949 when the capital was moved to Taipei, dropping the entire history of the ROC in China. Recently, however, she’s been moving away from that formula in her speeches, for example in her last New Year’s address following the flag-raising ceremony, she did not mention the ROC at all, only Taiwan (10 times). That the ROC was not mentioned after a ceremony based around the ROC flag is noteworthy.
Most “move towards independence” supporters largely only support maintaining the ROC name and constitution because China has made it clear that would be a pretext for war. With death a possibility, many have decided they can live with the ROC name, after all: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
The presumptive DPP presidential candidate and now party chair, Vice President Lai Ching-te’s (賴清德) public stance is the same as President Tsai’s, though there are rumors he is at heart more “pro-independence” than Tsai. It is likely that during the presidential race some KMT figures will attempt to use that to raise alarm, suggesting that a vote for Lai would be a vote for war with China.
Where do Eric Chu and Hou Yu-ih stand?
Two important politicians whose stance we do not know are New Taipei Mayor Hou Yu-ih (侯友宜) and KMT party Chair Eric Chu (朱立倫). Hou studiously avoids the issue, and the only hint we have is that he does appear to support the ROC.
During the 2016 presidential race, Eric Chu sounded very much like “Ma Ying-jeou lite,” but then last June shifted gears dramatically, saying that the KMT was “anti-Communist,” “pro-U.S.” and tried to water down the 1992 Consensus by calling it a “non-consensus consensus.” He’s since backtracked however, re-affirming his support for the 1992 Consensus and now sounds more conciliatory to China, with his new slogan being “close to the U.S., friendly to Japan and peace with China.”
Having been all over the place on this issue, it’s hard to determine what Chu actually thinks personally. Or even if he has a stance of his own.
Update: added details to Ma Ying-jeou's birth for clarity.