With the nation in the midst of an economic downturn, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said in an interview with a foreign media outlet that although the relationship between Taiwan and China is special, it is not state-to-state in nature. The Presidential Office added that the cross-strait relationship involves two “areas.” It appears that Taiwan’s sovereignty can now be downplayed.
In 1991, president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) ended emergency measures for the “communist rebellion” and said there was “one China, two areas and two political entities.” He did so to counteract China’s “one country, two systems” and not as a plan for long-term peace and stability. Whereas Lee’s “one country, two areas” referred to one “free area” and one “fallen area,” today we have returned to the original meaning — the “Taiwan area” and the “Mainland area.”
At the time, Mainland Affairs Council chairman Huang Kun-huei (黃昆輝) attempted to apply for UN membership for Taiwan using a “one country, two seats” model, while then minister of economic affairs Chiang Pin-kung (江丙坤) at an APEC meeting in Seattle tested the notion of two Chinas for a transitional period.
However, with China’s refusal to recognize Taiwan as an equal political entity and procrastination by conservatives led by then premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村), these efforts proved futile.
Before stepping down, Lee drew a red line with his statement about a “special state-to-state relationship” between Taiwan and China: the so-called “state-to-state” discourse. Although this did not explicitly claim there was one Taiwan and one China, it clearly said that there were two Chinas. This is also why Beijing hates Lee.
Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) dared not cross the line and could only ambiguously say that there were “two Chinese countries.” The Democratic Progressive Party was in power and Taiwan was independent; the only mission left was to correct the national title.
Chen’s foreign policies were aimed at mobilizing party supporters at elections and did not serve the interests of the public. Wavering between abolishing the Guidelines for National Unification and the National Unification Council and promoting cross-strait integration, Chen’s use of the slogan “one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait” was only a metaphor for the “two China” discourse.
The thrust of Ma’s policy toward China has always been “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” based on the so-called “1992 consensus” created by Su Chi (蘇起), now secretary-general of the National Security Council.
Ma wants to shelve the sovereignty dispute and avoid confrontation with China in exchange for gestures of Chinese goodwill, including allowing Taiwanese participation in international organizations. This subordinates Taiwan’s diplomacy to China’s and is the reason why Ma has proposed “flexible diplomacy” and a “diplomatic truce.”
If the biggest sovereignty issue were the status of Kinmen and Matsu, then shelving the dispute would be acceptable.
But Beijing still maintains that Taiwan is a breakaway province, and Taipei is reacting meekly and subserviently, as if it were abandoning sovereignty.
When a weaker state makes unilateral concessions, it only harms itself. This is the reality of international politics. Taiwan can hold talks with China on not undermining one another, but it must not depend on China.
If Ma does this out of rigid adherence to the constitutional “one China” formula, then he is naive; if he does so because of international realities, then he is beyond help; but if he does so to revive the economy without concern for sovereignty, then he is doomed.
Shih Cheng-feng is dean of the College of Indigenous Studies at National Dong Hwa University.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS