institution building,good governance and democratic progress.He Donghang and Xie Weimin point out the problem in the process of China's national identification:the development of civil identity has fell behind that of ethnic identity.4 According to Yao Dali,it is important to speed up political democratization in order to cultivate and consolidate national identity in a multi-ethnic country like China.For Yao,the ideas of sovereignty and equality among people of different strata are the spirit of modern nation-state and also the basic principle of democracy.5 Jin Taijun and Mi Jing argue that political ideas such as democracy,freedom and human rights,as well as institutions based on them are most important to national identity,particularly to a country with diversified identities and multiple belongings of individuals,which is a product of globalization.6 Lin Shangli agrees that the most fundamental dimension of national identity is identification with state institutions,which have decisive significance for building modern countries.Democracy is the political foundation of national identity in modern society.7 In the case of Taiwan,however,political discourse in the mainland has focused more on cultural similarities and ethnic equivalence of people between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and less on the so-called institutional identification(zhidu rentong).Obviously,this is because the Taiwanese population is predominantly Han Chinese(except for a tiny portion of aboriginals),and Beijing's unification formula is "one country,two systems."Cultural exchanges between the two sides,therefore,were proposed by Beijing as early as 1979.Beijing's open-door policy and peaceful unification appeal to the island,plus Taipei's decision in 1987 to allow cross-strait family reunions for old soldiers who had followed Chiang to Taiwan in the late 1940s have encouraged more people-to-people exchanges between the two sides based on their family ties,hometown connection and ethnic feelings,in addition to business purposes.From ethnic and cultural perspectives,former PRC Chairman Yang Shangkun proclaimed in 1987 that Taiwanese authorities should respect Chinese "overall national interest"(minzu dayi)and have peace talks with Beijing on the unification matter,and former PRC Chairman Jiang Zemin considered Chinese culture as the important foundation for peaceful unification with Taiwan in his 1995 "eight points"remarks.It is worthy to point out that Taiwanese leader Lee Teng-hui responded immediately then by saying that cross-strait exchanges could be based on the foundation of Chinese culture.Many people in Taiwan,including some supporters of the pro-independent DPP, even claimed that Chinese culture was better preserved on the island than in the mainland,as Taiwan has been free of the anti-tradition May 4th movement and Cultural Revolution on the other side of the strait.Despite Taipei's de-sinicization activities under the DPP administration,Beijing has still regarded Chinese culture as the spiritual tie across the strait.Cultural exchanges have made great progress since the KMT came back to power in 2008.As Liu Xiangping argues, cultural identity is one of the basic elements in national identity,followed by ethnic identity (minzhu rentong)and state identity (guojia rentong).In terms of cultural identity,the two sides have more homogeneity than heterogeneity.In terms of state identity,the gap between the two 14 He Donghang&Xie Weimin,"Process of Chinese National Identity and Its Constraining Factors"(zhongguo 含g9 Da enu hne(r论Chen8品mn eds.,Yuanda,No.17 (Beijing:Capital Normal University Press,2012),147. Jin Taijun and Mi Jing,"Reconstruction of National Identity under the Background of Globalization:From the Perspective of Territory Disputes"(cong lingtu fenzhen kan quanqiuhua Beijingxia guojia rentong chonggou), Jianghai Xuekan,2013,No.4,113-114. Lin Shangli,"The Political Logic of Identity Construction of Modem State"(xiandai guojia rentong jiangou de zhengzhi luoji),Chinese Social Sciences (zhongguo shehui kexue),2013,No.8,27-28. 99 institution building, good governance and democratic progress. He Donghang and Xie Weimin point out the problem in the process of China’s national identification: the development of civil identity has fell behind that of ethnic identity.14 According to Yao Dali, it is important to speed up political democratization in order to cultivate and consolidate national identity in a multi-ethnic country like China. For Yao, the ideas of sovereignty and equality among people of different strata are the spirit of modern nation-state and also the basic principle of democracy.15 Jin Taijun and Mi Jing argue that political ideas such as democracy, freedom and human rights, as well as institutions based on them are most important to national identity, particularly to a country with diversified identities and multiple belongings of individuals, which is a product of globalization.16 Lin Shangli agrees that the most fundamental dimension of national identity is identification with state institutions, which have decisive significance for building modern countries. Democracy is the political foundation of national identity in modern society.17 In the case of Taiwan, however, political discourse in the mainland has focused more on cultural similarities and ethnic equivalence of people between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and less on the so-called institutional identification (zhidu rentong). Obviously, this is because the Taiwanese population is predominantly Han Chinese (except for a tiny portion of aboriginals), and Beijing’s unification formula is “one country, two systems.” Cultural exchanges between the two sides, therefore, were proposed by Beijing as early as 1979. Beijing’s open-door policy and peaceful unification appeal to the island, plus Taipei’s decision in 1987 to allow cross-strait family reunions for old soldiers who had followed Chiang to Taiwan in the late 1940s have encouraged more people-to-people exchanges between the two sides based on their family ties, hometown connection and ethnic feelings, in addition to business purposes. From ethnic and cultural perspectives, former PRC Chairman Yang Shangkun proclaimed in 1987 that Taiwanese authorities should respect Chinese “overall national interest” (minzu dayi) and have peace talks with Beijing on the unification matter, and former PRC Chairman Jiang Zemin considered Chinese culture as the important foundation for peaceful unification with Taiwan in his 1995 “eight points” remarks. It is worthy to point out that Taiwanese leader Lee Teng-hui responded immediately then by saying that cross-strait exchanges could be based on the foundation of Chinese culture. Many people in Taiwan, including some supporters of the pro-independent DPP, even claimed that Chinese culture was better preserved on the island than in the mainland, as Taiwan has been free of the anti-tradition May 4th movement and Cultural Revolution on the other side of the strait. Despite Taipei’s de-sinicization activities under the DPP administration, Beijing has still regarded Chinese culture as the spiritual tie across the strait. Cultural exchanges have made great progress since the KMT came back to power in 2008. As Liu Xiangping argues, cultural identity is one of the basic elements in national identity, followed by ethnic identity (minzhu rentong) and state identity (guojia rentong). In terms of cultural identity, the two sides have more homogeneity than heterogeneity. In terms of state identity, the gap between the two 14 He Donghang & Xie Weimin, “Process of Chinese National Identity and Its Constraining Factors” (zhongguo guojia rentong de licheng yu zhiyue yinsu), Marxism and Reality (makesi zhiyi yu xianshi), 2012, No. 4, 16. 15 Yao Dali, “National Identity in Change” (biandongzhong de guojia rentong), in Chen Ming and Zhu Hanmin, eds., Yuanda, No.17（Beijing: Capital Normal University Press, 2012）, 147. 16 Jin Taijun and Mi Jing, “Reconstruction of National Identity under the Background of Globalization: From the Perspective of Territory Disputes” (cong lingtu fenzhen kan quanqiuhua Beijingxia guojia rentong chonggou), Jianghai Xuekan, 2013, No. 4, 113-114. 17 Lin Shangli, “The Political Logic of Identity Construction of Modern State” (xiandai guojia rentong jiangou de zhengzhi luoji), Chinese Social Sciences (zhongguo shehui kexue), 2013, No. 8, 27-28