Print

Mail

wiki links

Equality needs acknowledgement

Using the media to communicating its Taiwan policy has long been the method used by Chinese authorities. Recently, Qian Qichen (錢其琛) again made comments to visiting members of the Taiwanese media to the effect that "One China" (一個中國) has already assumed a more flexible definition. In the past Beijing stuck to its position that "Taiwan is a part of China;" now, however, they want to adjust its stance to: "the mainland and Taiwan are both parts of China." The underlying meaning of Qian's words clearly indicates that Beijing has already made considerable compromises in terms of its position vis-a-vis the Taiwan question. And further, according to the new definition, Taiwan and China can conduct future cross-strait negotiations on an equal basis.

As for the expression "One China," Wang Daohan (汪道涵) has voiced his own views, and now Qian has offered his personal opinion. But how long it will be before Jiang Zemin (江澤民) chooses to state his thoughts on the matter, no one can know for sure. Looking at the pronouncements of Chinese leaders over the last few months, it can be seen that Beijing's Taiwan policy lacks a definite and stable direction. Referring to past models, it should be remembered that decision makers Li Xiannian (李先念), Hu Yaobang (胡耀邦), and Zhao Ziyang (趙紫陽) all spoke on issues related to Taiwan policy. But in the time since they departed the political scene, has anything they said ever counted?

Why are Chinese officials unwilling to issue a formal statement? Selectively and ambiguously expressing one's personal opinion can't be regarded as formal policy. Zhou Enlai (周恩來) once said that China could wait a thousand years to resolve the Taiwan question. Can his words be trusted? Mao Zedong (毛澤東) even expressed his support for Taiwanese independence. Still, can these words be believed? Those in power will inevitably change policy. Thus it is still uncertain when Qian's words will be able to win the endorsement of the central government.

Analyzing Qian's talk in closer detail, his position basically hasn't changed. He has merely taken the different "internal" and "external" definitions of "One China" and stated them more clearly. To visitors from Taiwan he says, "The mainland and Taiwan are both parts of China." When he meets foreign dignitaries, he changes to "Taiwan is a part of China." Playing both sides like this forever puts Beijing in a advantageous, controlling position. Clearly, there is no concept of equal status across the Strait behind Qian's most recent wordplay.

If the statement "the mainland and Taiwan are both part of China" implied equal status for the two sides, then, just as "the mainland" can expand its space internationally, why should Taiwan be bullied into not doing so? In this game of words, China has grossly overestimated its cleverness.

In his "trip for democratic diplomacy," President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has expressed that, as long as the ROC exists, there will be no retreat from the theatre of foreign diplomacy. This is correct -- if Taiwan and China are supposed to stand on equal footing, and Beijing is able to gain a foothold on the international stage, then Taiwan should also be given some space internationally. Only if both sides can co-exist on a foundation of true equality can progress be made in cross-strait negotiations. And only by extending this concept of equal status to the handling of the Guidelines for National Unification (國統綱領), will it be possible to avoid falling into Beijing's trap. The Guidelines need to be amended to make Taiwan a political entity, and recognize the principle that both sides of the Strait share equal status. The opposition has pressured A-bian's government all along to accept the Guidelines for National Unification in their present, unamended form. And now Beijing's Xinhua News Agency (新華社) has joined the ranks of the opposition parties, calling for A-bian (阿扁) to chair the Council on National Unification (國統會). These attacks, along with Qian's recent utterances,challenge A-bian's government.

The government should, however, handle this matter cautiously, and not be in a hurry to react. Taiwan has to be vociferous with its counter-argument: that only when Taiwan and China share truly equal status internationally, can cross-strait negotiations conducted on an equal footing be realized. The new opposition has continuously given its one-sided definition the "One-China" question. Now that Beijing has added its voice to the chorus, can A-bian's government afford not to take serious defensive measures?

Chen Fang-ming is a Professor of Chinese Literature at National Chengchi University

Translated by Scudder Smith
This story has been viewed 2089 times.