Stop disturbing others and yourselves: Comment

With regard to the China's "Anti-Secession Law" which has just been passed, the international reactions are on the whole in the positive. However, before and after the approval of the Law some few foreign officials and media aired some irresponsible views in this regard.

The following three are something representative: one says it's not necessary; the second is no good time for it and the third is that the influence is in the negative. The views and opinions are beyond doubt irresponsible when they did not read the articles and clauses of the "Anti-Secession Law". However, it's a doubled mistake to lead the public opinion up the garden path by confusing the right and wrong when they've gone over the text.

That the National People's Congress passed the law with very high approvals is an eloquent fact to indicate very clearly the will of 1.3 billion Chinese people. That is to say, the working out of the "Anti-Secession Law" is quite necessary, at the very opportune time and it will produce an active and profound influence for promoting the great cause of peaceful reunification of China and for opposing and curbing the "Taiwan Independence" forces.

With regard to the necessity, the "Taiwan Independence" activities went quite rampant over the past 10 years, constituting a very big threat to the situation along the Taiwan Straits and the stability of the Asia-Pacific region. And in recent years the diehards of the "Taiwan Independence" forces have by doubling their efforts attempted to pass the "constitutional reform", trying to find a legal way out for "Taiwan Independence".

Under the circumstances, we work out a tit-for-tat "Anti-Secession Law". How can you say it's not necessary? On this globe no sovereign state will be able to tolerate the national secession behavior.

As a matter of fact, it's an international practice to oppose the national secession by way of legislation. Prior to the War of Secession in the United States of America, many "Anti-Secession Law"s were passed. Canada passed the likewise law when the Quebec was demanding for independence.

What must be mentioned here is that the expression used in the English version of the Chinese "Anti-Secession Law" to suggest the meaning of "split" is the very word "secession" as used by the Americans at that time. In any country that advocates the governance by law, legislation is the necessary measure for opposing and curbing the national separation.

As regards the time, in the situation along the Taiwan Straits there occur some positive factors favorable for curbing the "Taiwan Independence" forces. Some people in alien lands are of opinion that the debut of the "Anti-Secession Law" at this moment will "incur some unstable factors". If this is not out of ulterior motive the worry is understandable but not necessary at all.

The favorable turn taking place in the situation along the Taiwan Straits is the outcome achieved by the Chinese government and people in their unremitting struggles against the "Taiwan Independence" forces and in the meanwhile we have to keep a clear mind that to eradicate the passive impacts roused by the "Taiwan Independence" forces over the past 10 years or so in the Island is still a very hard job to achieve.

Of course, we treasure very much the new situation which has hardly come by but will in no way slacken imposing curbs and pressures on the "Taiwan Independence" forces. To have worked out the "Anti-Secession Law" under this background is favorable for consolidating the outcome already achieved, favorable to impose new and continuous pressures on the "Taiwan Independence" forces and also favorable for taking the initiative so as to avoid being landed in a passive position.

As to the "negative influence" it's not worth refuting at all. Even before the completion of the review and the promulgation of the "Anti-Secession Law" quite few foreign media began wantonly to "demonize" the Law as if they had already got to "know without consulting the oracle".

On the very day when the "Anti-Secession Law" was about to be passed, a "pre-enlightened and pre-informed" US newspaper, continuing to slander and culminate the Chinese "Anti-Secession Law", went so far as to put up a headline "China writes into the law its threat to Taiwan".

Any people without biases will acknowledge that most of the articles and clauses in the "Anti-Secession Law" deal with how to maintain and promote the peace and stability on both sides of the Taiwan Straits and epitomize the greatest sincerity and goodwill of the Chinese people in the winning of peaceful reunification.

The "Anti-Secession Law" is not a law for resorting to military means against Taiwan nor is it a mobilization order for war. However, it doesn't mean at all the commitment of giving up the use of armed forces. It is not aimed at the people in Taiwan Island but the elements for "Taiwan Independence" and never allows them to carve Taiwan out from China in any name or by any means. On the contrary, all those attacks and slanders indicate very clearly that the "Anti-Secession Law" hits right to the vital point, the Achilles' heel of the "Taiwan Independence" forces and the anti-China figures.

The working out by China the "Anti-Secession Law" is in full conformity with the national constitution and based fully on the international law and caters fully to the benefits of the broad masses of the Chinese people and the Taiwan compatriots. It is good for the stability of the Asia-Pacific region and is sure to get the extensive understanding and support.

The gesticulation and remarks of the few US officials and media serve only to show their unreasonable interference of the internal affairs of China and are detrimental to the stability of the situation along the Taiwan Straits and the healthy development of the Sino-US relations.

With regard to those remarks, even some American people felt to be impassable. Ralph Cossa, Executive Director of Pacific Forum CSIS, published an article the other day, saying that the "Anti-Secession Law" has embodied China's respect for legal governance, giving expression to the existing law and policy in China and there is no need for the US to "worry about imaginary troubles".

We would like to give a piece of advice to some individuals and media that they should call a halt as quickly as possible to the harmful and non-beneficial disturbances of others and of themselves.

By People's Daily Online