Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's (
Lien's acknowledgement of the "1992 consensus" on "one China" covering the two sides of the Taiwan Strait is problematic for several reasons. President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) government has never acknowledged the existence of this "consensus." In a recently released autobiography, this view is supported by the late Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) chairman Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫), who represented the government in the 1992 meeting with Chinese representatives in Hong Kong in which the "consensus" is said to have been reached.
Lien's acceptance of the "consensus" clashes with Taiwan's cross-strait policy. He is also treading on dangerous legal ground. The existence or not of the "consensus" impacts on the political status of the country. The power to acknowledge such a consensus is reserved by the government. Evidently, Lien has not learned his lesson from KMT Vice Chairman Chiang Pin-kun (
The KMT hopes that by phrasing the agreement reached between Hu and Lien as a "vision" and by packaging it as a "press communique," Lien will be able to avoid legal trouble. This remains to be seen. But what he has done is no less inappropriate, if not downright despicable.
To publicly contradict the government's cross-strait policy by echoing the views of a regime bearing hostility toward Taiwan in full view of the international community amounts to a betrayal of the worst kind.
It must be pointed out that Koo's performance in negotiations with Chinese officials was a lot more praiseworthy than Lien's. In 1998, during his last meeting with Wang Daohan (
Even though Lien can never come close to being the negotiator or diplomat that Koo was, at the very least he could have conveyed the feelings of humiliation and resentment that Taiwanese feel over the Anti-Secession Law. At the very least he could have told Hu that "unification" with China would become a more palatable option for the people of Taiwan when and only when China democratizes. But he said nothing of the sort.
At the end of the day, perhaps it was a mistake to hold any hope that Lien would give a remotely adequate performance in China. After all, he did not have much leverage or negotiating power. Shaking hands with Hu and issuing a semblance of a joint statement is the last card that Lien can play to salvage his political career and postpone retirement.
Lien's colleagues in the KMT are already talking about him running for president -- for the third time. So how does it help Lien if his five-point "vision" accomplishes nothing for the Taiwanese people?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS