Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) denied a report in yesterday’s Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) that the Presidential Office is considering reinstating the National Unification Council and he reiterated President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) policy of “no unification, no independence and no use of force.” However, given Ma’s past promotion of “eventual unification” with China, his cross-strait policies are once again being questioned.
The council was established in 1990 under the previous Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration and the National Unification Guidelines were drawn up to define the cross-strait status quo and regulate the short, middle and long-term stages of unification. The guidelines also defined the term “one China” — the source of the so-called “1992 Consensus” — as “one China with each side having different interpretations.”
The council and the guidelines were pacifiers aimed at placating pro-unification KMT members and Beijing, and allowing democracy and human rights time and space to develop. But with a burgeoning Taiwanese consciousness, coupled with democracy and freedom, the public wanted to be the masters of their country. Following the introduction of direct presidential elections, former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) private visit to the US and China’s military threats against Taiwan, unification became increasingly unlikely, and the council was given an annual budget of just NT$1,000 and stripped of its functions.
In 2006, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) terminated the operations of the council and abolished the guidelines. Taiwan would no longer act on the premise of unification. The “status quo” became that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country. Any change to this situation must be decided upon by all Taiwanese in a plebiscite.
Between 1990 and 2006, Taiwan’s intellectual climate progressed from pondering unification to thinking about self-determination. Reinstating the council and the guidelines would run counter to public opinion and negate 18 years of democratic development.
Ma’s government has worked hard to curry favor with China. To bring about cross-strait direct flights and open Taiwan to Chinese tourism, it has been willing to disregard national security concerns, sit idly by as Chinese airlines took it upon themselves to fly in a straight line across the Taiwan Strait rather than passing through Hong Kong airspace, and opening up Taipei Songshan Airport, an important military airport, to cross-strait flights.
The government has also proven willing to disregard national dignity by degrading President Ma to Mr Ma when meeting with Chinese officials in Taiwan. The government has created a conciliatory atmosphere and reinstating the council would only fuel Chinese ambitions to annex Taiwan. If Taiwan is unwilling to discuss a timetable for unification as stipulated in the guidelines, China would be able to attack Taiwan by invoking its “Anti-Secession” Law.
Reinstating the council and the guidelines is bad long-term strategy. Taiwan’s rapid moves toward China have changed the sensitive regional situation, alarming the US, Japan and neighboring countries. Reinstating the council would send a clear message to the international community and could have even more severe consequences to Taiwan’s international and national security strategies than the original decision to terminate the council.
The only hope is that the idea to revive the council and the guidelines was simply part of a National Security Council brainstorming session and was not meant to become official policy. Otherwise, it would be the beginning of the end of Taiwan’s sovereignty, and could turn Ma, not into a Mr, but a chief executive.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with