While receiving Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) on Sunday, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) praised communication between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), supporting a continued role for talks between the two parties in cross-strait relations.
At the same time, he deflected potential criticism that promoting a party-to-party platform to improve government-to-government relations smacks of a one-party state.
This he did by portraying talks between the KMT and the CCP as complementary — with limited powers — to negotiations between the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS).
“Today, political parties can no longer dictate government policies,” Ma said, even as the KMT chairman prepared to embark on an eight-day visit to China.
The KMT was fulfilling a “responsibility,” the president said, encouraging the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to do the same following a visit to China by Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊), the most prominent DPP figure to cross the Strait in an official capacity.
Ma’s remarks were carefully weighed. They were an acknowledgment of public fears that the party-to-party platform may influence national concerns, which would be inappropriate for a non-transparent, non-governmental mechanism.
At the same time, Ma’s comments may have been intended to allay concerns within his party that he might reduce the scope of KMT-CCP communication.
Wu headed to China on Sunday amid speculation that Ma is unhappy with occasional differences — even friction — between his administration and the KMT headquarters and caucus.
During the KMT’s years in opposition, party-to-party talks were the KMT’s only channel for influencing cross-strait developments.
Having regained the presidency, however, the continuation of KMT-CCP talks outside SEF-ARATS negotiations, as well as the potential for disunity in the agendas pursued through the two channels, has fueled speculation that Ma is eyeing Wu’s place at the head of the KMT.
Indeed, Ma is faced with a balancing act that would make pursuing the KMT chairmanship a logical option.
With no sign that KMT-CCP talks will cease anytime soon despite the party’s return to power, the president must ensure that the talks do not undermine the government’s authority in cross-strait matters.
Any gap between the government’s objectives and the agenda of the KMT risks providing Chinese negotiators with an opportunity to pit these interests against one another.
In terms of the national interest, however, the KMT-CCP platform has nothing to offer. This was the case during the former DPP administration and it remains so today. Taiwan does not stand to benefit from murky contacts that undermine national sovereignty.
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