Negotiations on a cross-strait peace agreement can not be completed overnight. Only with the "2005 consensus" as a basis can we gradually build mutual trust and benefits and push for stable cross-strait peace development.
The consensus is not an official consensus document signed by the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Rather, it is a tacit agreement that has been accepted by the two sides as a model for negotiations since January 2005. It has the following special characteristics: It leaves disputes aside, sets no conditions, demands mutual respect and relies on pragmatism, government direction and civil assistance.
The fact is that Taiwan and China did not reach a concrete written consensus in 1992, nor did the two parties reach a tacit agreement on the "one China" principle or the sovereignty dispute. At that time, they merely decided to set political disputes aside and push for talks on practical concerns.
Since 1992, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has insisted that the so-called "1992 consensus" says there is one China, with each side making its own interpretation, while the Chinese government's interpretation is that both sides agree to the "one China" principle. Over the past 15 years, no Chinese official has said that the consensus means that there is one China, with each side making its interpretation.
Although the two sides held many talks on practical matters after 1993, no agreement was reached because Beijing refused to deal with the jurisdiction of Taiwan. On Jan. 2, 2005, however, Beijing finally gave up its demand that the "one China" principle be a precondition and restarted cross-strait talks on practical matters.
On the basis of this new consensus, the two sides have already reached three agreements on cross-strait charter flights since 2005, including charter flights for the Lunar New Year holidays and four special cases, with a total of 443 flights. Today, the two sides are involved in three negotiations: Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan, passenger flights and cargo charter flights.
After the presidential election on March 22, China's attempts to affect Taiwan's election results will no longer be a factor and the two sides are likely to reach agreements very soon. As these negotiations on functional affairs are completed, talks will be extended to other issues.
Taiwan and China will then be able to push for stable cross-strait peace development on the basis of a "2005 consensus" rather than the controversial so-called "1992 consensus."
Tung Chen-yuan is the vice chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers