Dialogue Over Division: Lessons from Strait Talk, Tokyo Chapter

David Feng - China Affairs Director - 1/30/2025

Imagine receiving an orange; a sweet, savory, and juicy fruit that you crave. You think ‘ Without this orange, I will surely suffer.’ Your partner walks in, “I want that orange. I love oranges so much, I’ll perish without them.” Logically, you might ask about their perspective, “Why do you want this orange?” However, 70% of the time, we fail to ask this question, leading to unnecessary arguments. This kind of conflict happens from micro to macro, and every level in-between. Take, for example, the bloodless and humorous Whiskey War between Canada and Denmark over Hans Island, more severe crises like those between Japan and South Korea, or violent conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war.

Of recent, one of the most enduring conflicts is between Taiwan and Mainland China, ongoing since 1949. Initially centered on questions of international legitimacy between the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People’s Republic of China (Mainland China), the dispute has evolved as Taiwan’s growing democratic identity conflicts with China’s emphasis on national unity. The US plays a significant role in this dynamic, viewing the Taiwan Strait as crucial to its Indo-Pacific security policy. The 2018 US-China trade war escalated tensions further, bringing US allies, including Japan, into heightened security concerns.

In 2005, Brown University student Johnny Lin and Professor Tatsushi Arai founded ‘Strait Talk’ (海峽尋新), a program gathering young scholars from Taiwan, Mainland China, and the US to foster peacebuilding in cross-Strait relations. Over the past 20 years, Strait Talk has expanded from Brown University to UCLA, Hong Kong, Taipei, Edmonton, and Washington, DC, at the George Washington University, engaging thousands of alumni worldwide. In 2024, Strait Talk hosted two symposiums in Washington and Tokyo, incorporating Japanese delegates for the first time. I was fortunate to work for the Washington chapter and even more fortunate to join the Tokyo chapter as a Taiwanese delegate, leaving lasting impacts on my personal and professional development.

Some may ask, why join Strait Talk? How does it differ from Model UN? While Model UN is a popular platform for discussing international issues, Taiwan has not been a UN member since 1971 due to Resolution 2578. Strait Talk moves beyond traditional diplomatic simulations, focusing on cross-Strait relations using the Interactive Conflict Resolution method. This approach shifts delegates away from zero-sum thinking and rigid position-taking. Instead of directly addressing political disputes, the symposium began by examining the core of conflicts: basic human needs (BHN). Most conflict arises from differing goals and miscommunication. Identifying and understanding each party’s BHN is essential to bridging these divides. Yet, when we Taiwanese delegates attempted to define our BHN, we found no clear consensus. Is it democracy, security, or self-identity? The same exercise as done by Chinese, American, and Japanese delegates revealed their shared concerns over security and economic stability.

After defining BHNs, we formulated a dilemma question: “How can we develop cross-Strait relations where Mainland China ensures its legitimacy, national unity, and international standing; Taiwan expresses its distinct identity and seeks recognition; and the US and Japan fulfill their respective security and economic needs?” This question encapsulated the conflicting priorities of all stakeholders.

Mainland China views Taiwan as an indispensable part of China, tying its loss to national pride through historical grievances from the ‘Century of Humiliation.’ Meanwhile, Taiwan has developed a unique identity over the past 70 years, emphasizing democracy and autonomy. Japan and the US complicate this landscape, prioritizing regional stability, security, and economic interests. Voices from Okinawa were included in this symposium, adding a unique dimension and highlighting concerns over military tensions and the historical impact of conflict in their region. Okinawa was severely damaged by the end of WWII in one of the final, bloodiest battles of the Pacific Theatre. Afterwards, the islands were occupied by US troops until 1974.

Given such complex dilemmas , we drafted a consensus paper advocating gradual de-escalation and peacebuilding inspired by the Helsinki Process (1972-1975). Given the lack of formal recognition between Taipei and Beijing, we proposed a Track 1.5 diplomacy model—a semi-official dialogue whereby senior officials engage in civil society exchanges as private citizens, with US and Japanese representatives acknowledging mutually determined outcomes. This initiative aimed to facilitate trust and prevent military escalation while also respecting the special relations between Beijing and Taipei.

Beyond security concerns, our paper emphasized economic cooperation on green energy. Geopolitical tensions and climate change have disrupted trade, threatened supply chains, and endangered material sources, making economic collaboration crucial. One delegate proposed the Four-Strait Green Investment Fund, modeled after the Quad Investors Network (QUIN), to finance green energy projects involving Taiwan, Mainland China, the US, and Japan. Unlike QUIN, which includes state-owned enterprises, this initiative focuses on private investment to bypass political recognition issues and foster regional cooperation.

Drafting this consensus paper was challenging. The symposium's intense schedule often stretched from 9 AM to 9 PM and was filled with discussions, debates, and frustrations. Yet, despite the exhaustion, all delegates remained committed to this constructive dialogue for peace. Interestingly, many of us lived together in traditional Japanese dormitory-style housing, an experience reminiscent of diplomatic shuttle negotiations in the 1960s. To no secret, this is where shuttle diplomacy occurs every night.

On the final day, we presented our findings at a public event. I was struck by the diverse audience's keen interest in the Taiwan Strait issue. People from various backgrounds and nationalities were eager to hear how young professionals from different regions could propose peaceful solutions. Their enthusiasm reaffirmed how the desire for stability and cooperation transcends political divisions. And like the birds and bees in the garden, they assisted in spreading the word for Strait Talk by sharing what they witnessed, allowing more news and acknowledgment of the conflict resolution symposium that welcomes young professionals.

Reflecting on my time from Strait Talk’s Washington to Tokyo chapter, conflict resolution extends beyond diplomacy and policy; it is also not as simple as sharing personal identities and stories. Back in Washington, I only witnessed people sharing their experience with the Taiwan Strait issue, whether a story on identity or experience working in a professional field. However, engaging in deep discussions and addressing ideological differences in Tokyo reinforced the reality that peacebuilding is neither simple nor quick. Despite progress being achievable through sustained dialogue and effort to mutually understand one another, I could feel the toll of flying 12 hours from Washington to Tokyo for these 12 hour shifts.

Peaceful negotiations through dialogue and understanding should maximize mutual benefits for all involved parties. Leaving Tokyo, I carried away a deeper understanding of the complexities across the Taiwan Strait and a renewed sense of responsibility. I felt that my fellow delegates and I were tasked with the duty to achieve peace for those who long for it. The friendships forged, ideas shared, and consensus reached were not mere theoretical exercises—they laid the foundation for a future where dialogue prevails over division. This experience reinforced my belief that meaningful change starts with individuals willing to engage, listen, and persevere, even when faced with seemingly insurmountable challenges.