Almost two weeks ago, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) honorary chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) met with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) in Beijing, and broached the “one country, two areas (一國兩區)” concept as, Wu said, he had been entrusted to do.
The news caused an uproar in Taiwan. Although President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has said the proposal is in line with the Republic of China (ROC) Constitution, vice president-elect Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), knowing full well that Beijing intends to put the Taiwan-based Cross-Straits Common Market Foundation (CSCMF) on equal footing with its Hong Kong and Macau counterparts, still attended the Boao Forum for Asia annual conference on Sunday in the capacity of the CSCMF’s chief advisor, with Ma’s approval.
This is tantamount to the government announcing to the international community that the “one country, two areas” proposal recognizes Beijing’s basic position of the “one China” principle, in which “Taiwan is part of China.” Taiwanese are seeing their room to maneuver in international law being appropriated by Beijing at an ever-increasing rate.
In response to concerns over the new proposal, Ma has said it complies with the Constitution, adding that neither of former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) or Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) amended the relevant parts of the Constitution when in office, thereby indicating their tacit agreement. They were, so Ma’s suggestion goes, “one country, two area” presidents.
However, the Ma administration has been joining Beijing to attack Lee’s model of a “special state-to-state relationship” and Chen’s “one country on either side” of the Taiwan Strait.
Clearly, the pronouncements on the nature of Taiwan’s sovereignty by its national leaders does have a considerable bearing on how Beijing and the international community recognize Taiwan’s status. Otherwise, would Beijing have hurried through the “Anti-Secession” Law despite no changes having been made to the relevant parts of the ROC Constitution at the time?
The government thinks it can hide behind the Constitution to cover up that it is complying with Beijing’s “one China” principle. The Constitution was the same in the Lee and Chen periods, but Taiwanese were not worried about Taiwan losing its sovereignty. However, concerns over Taiwan being annexed by China have risen dramatically since Ma took office.
Now, regardless of how China defines the status of the CSCMF relative to similar institutions in Hong Kong and Macau, Wu Den-yih’s attendance at the Boao Forum constitutes an indication to the international community that the government’s “one country, two areas” proposal comprises a tacit recognition of the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) position that Taiwan is essentially a region belonging to it, with Taipei basically a regional government, and that it — the PRC — has agreed to have Wu Den-yih attend the forum in a consultant capacity. No wonder people suspect that the “one country, two areas” proposal is intended to pave the way for political talks between Taiwan and China.
The Ma administration has overseen the unraveling of all the hard work and consolidation of Taiwan’s sovereign status achieved through years of democratization.
If Taiwanese fail to register our protest in the strongest terms and Ma continues to confirm “one country, two areas” in international forums after May 20, we won’t be voting for a president in 2016 — we will be choosing our chief executive.
Lai I-chung is an executive committee member of Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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