When China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Minister Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) visited Japan recently, he addressed the US government and overseas Chinese, praising the results of the peaceful development of cross-strait relations. The US government has also shown its approval of cross-strait developments in recent years, which only goes to show that although cross-strait relations may not be international, they are closely related to the international community.
Early this month, Taiwan Affairs Office Deputy Director Gong Qinggai (龔清概) visited Taipei as the envoy for the APEC host country, China, to deliver an invitation to this year’s summit in Beijing. The invitation was received by Ministry of Foreign Affairs Department of International Organizations Director-General Chou Tai-chu (周台竹).
This process was well-covered by local media, including hearsay and accusations that Beijing intentionally chose a lower-ranked envoy. However, this all took place as Chinese authorities dealing with Taiwan tried to make a show of good will to mend the situation after former Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) was removed from his post.
The Presidential Office has not announced who will represent the nation at the summit, and this has led to widespread speculation that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has not given up on attending the summit in person. Some have even conjectured that there may have been discussions between the two sides about a meeting between Ma and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
The fact is China has taken a very clear position on a meeting between Ma and Xi, and that is, while it does not rule out such a meeting, it will not agree to holding it at any event of an international nature, such as the APEC summit.
Several Chinese think tanks dealing with Taiwan have also chimed in and suggested that a meeting could be arranged on Kinmen or Matsu in Taiwan or in China’s Fujian Province prior to the APEC summit.
While it is true that Taiwan could use Ma’s attendance at the APEC summit and a meeting with Xi, the president of the host country, as a bargaining chip when discussing future developments in cross-strait talks, this is a major political project that involves international and domestic political, economic, social and cultural aspects. Without plans for thorough complementary measures, and if the only purpose of such a meeting would be for Ma and Xi to shake hands at an international event, there will be strong opposition in Taiwan.
Furthermore, a meeting between the two must not be treated lightly. Such a meeting must hold true political significance in terms of reconciliation and a ceasefire in the civil war that has continued between the two sides since 1949, and it must allay public fears that China’s insistence on the so-called “1992 consensus,” the “one China” principle and the idea that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait both belong to “one China” means that China will annex Taiwan.
In other words, a meeting between Ma and Xi must be in line with the atmosphere in Taiwan if it is to come off smoothly. When it comes to the status of the two men, the two sides must insist on equality and respect, and avoid a dispute over sovereignty.
Ma will not be able to attend such a meeting in his capacity as president of the Republic of China (ROC), and the two would only be able to meet as the leaders of the Taiwanese and the Chinese areas.
More importantly, when it comes to the question of how to follow up on a meeting between Ma and Xi by entering the deep end of the pool for cross-strait political talks — including issues such as the status of the ROC and the ROC Constitution, as well as mutual military trust and the maintenance of security in the Taiwan Strait, US arms purchases and foreign affairs — the Ma administration must have far-reaching and well thought-out plans lest Taiwan be mired in controversy.
Whether or not a meeting between Ma and Xi will take place depends on the governments on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait and whether political parties are able to “liberate their minds.”
First of all, the Ma administration does not have to insist on a meeting at the APEC summit. If a meeting were to be held at the summit, it would steal focus from APEC issues and put other APEC member states in a difficult situation. The pros and cons of the situation must be given careful consideration.
As for China, its biggest concern is that “two Chinas” or “one China and one Taiwan” must not appear at an international event, but if Beijing were to take a broader view and definition of the ROC, a meeting between Ma and Xi is very likely to take place when the time is ripe.
Furthermore, the ROC, which was founded in 1912, and its Constitution, have nothing to do with the “1992 consensus” or the “one China” principle. The Guidelines for National Unification formulated by former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) was a visionary blueprint for the political status and future development of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. If theses guidelines could be made the foundation for a meeting between the leaders of the two sides, such a meeting would become a certainty.
As for Taiwan’s opposition parties, regardless of whether they like Beijing or not, they must take a rational view of a rising and increasingly stronger China. Dealing with China based on Cold War thinking will only leave them outside the international community and mainstream public opinion with its many supporters of the peaceful development of cross-strait relations. They do not have to oppose a meeting between Ma and Xi for opposition’s sake. Instead, they could take a cautiously positive attitude and participate in or even support such a meeting.
The transfer of government power has become the norm in Taiwan’s democratic politics, and that is the only way Taiwanese will be able to enjoy the fruits of a meeting between Ma and Xi when the Democratic Progressive Party next takes over the reins of government.
Shu Chin-chiang is an adviser to the Institute for National Policy Research.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under