In his speech on Double Ten National Day, President Chen Shui-bian (
While referring to the talks that took place between Taipei and Beijing in 1992, Chen used the words "the 1992 meeting," and not "the 1992 consensus." Both the opposition blue-camp and the media picked up on this phrase, saying that Chen was being insincere and that his words were said with the up-coming legislative elections in mind.
But is this criticism fair?
It is an oversimplification to accept or deny that there is "one China" -- with each side having its own interpretation -- as a determinant to goodwill or sincerity. The governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has always maintained you cannot expect Taiwan to show good intentions without seeing something in return from the Beijing.
The problem for both Chen and Taiwan is that even if they wish to strive towards "one China," they know full well that China is unlikely to promise not to use military force against the country. China has only said that they will definitely attack if Taiwan declares independence, but they have yet to say under what circumstances they will withdraw the threat of force. Furthermore, Taiwanese advocates of the so-called "1992 consensus" are concentrating on the words "each side has its own interpretation" -- whereas in Beijing, the crucial part of the phrase is "one China."
Renowned economist Kung Ming-hsin (
Regardless of who is in power, when dealing with the Chinese, they will be faced with similar problems, even those who accept the principle of "one China." A responsible government will want to go to the negotiating table with some kind of leverage. This would give them more power in defining what exactly "one China" means for Taiwan.
Internally, it is clear that Chen's words were aimed at garnering more votes in the legislative elections later this year. The blue camp are more at liberty to criticize the government, just as the DPP criticized them in the past. Were the blue camp in power -- with the ability to make decisions that would affect the country -- they would also concern themselves with how their words and actions would influence the electorate.
Chen certainly showed goodwill in his address, although to what degree he was sincere is a little more difficult to fathom. Can this goodwill be translated into actual policy? Some would say the most important thing is how the Chinese will respond to it, but even more important is whether or not Chen's team prepare their own contingency plan prior to implementing any such policy.
It turns out that the Executive Yuan, the Ministry of National Defense, and even the Presidential Office had no idea what Chen was going say in his address. Based on this, it seems that his words were simply intended to communicate his good intentions, but for what purpose?
I'm afraid that the consequences of Chen's words might not have been thought through. But at least the Americans noticed Chen's goodwill.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this