Wed, Oct 28, 2015 - Page 8 News List

The Liberty Times Editorial: The path that lies in front of Chu

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) held an extraordinary party conference on Oct. 17 to nominate KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) as its presidential candidate. The KMT’s removal of its original candidate — Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), who espoused eventual unification — implies that the party elite acknowledges that to survive, it must not be out of touch with public opinion. This is a positive development for both the KMT and the nation.

Since Chu is willing to take responsibility and face the electorate, the KMT must be reminded of a few things, as Chu is still clearing the battlefield and is about to make a fresh start.

If the KMT is merely replacing the “one China, same interpretation” ideology with the so-called “1992 consensus” to use that as the main theme to conduct its election campaign for the next three months, then it is just replacing one mistake with another.

The principal rationale behind Hung’s policy was that the “1992 consensus” had fulfilled its purpose and therefore the next step was to move from “one China, different interpretations” and “one China, no interpretation” frameworks to the concept of “one China, same interpretation.” She attempted to use the idea of a “whole China” to supplement the “one China” concept.

She thought President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) policy based on the “1992 consensus” only partially revealed his true intentions, whereas “one China, same interpretation” completely unveiled the KMT’s true purpose — eventual unification — and it is on this premise that the KMT would enter into a peace agreement with China.

Chu wants to keep the ambiguity, allowing each side to interpret what “one China” means on its terms. This is the path that the KMT has trodden since 2005, when the first meeting between former vice president Lien Chan (連戰) and then-Chinese president Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) was held. The KMT’s political line can be put to the test by adopting the “one China, different interpretations” framework.

The presidential election on Jan. 16 can be seen as a referendum — if the public supports the KMT’s political line, it would win the election; if the public opposes the political line, it would lose. The public should respect the KMT’s right to decide how it wants to forge its policy.

However, immediately after Chu was named as the party’s presidential candidate, the first gauntlet he threw down to Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was to ask for a debate on cross-strait relations and the maintenance of the “status quo.”

The public cannot help but look at the confrontation with doubt and worry. Does Chu want to use cross-strait relations to divide the public and paint a beautiful picture of the KMT’s alliance with the Chinese Communist Party? That way, the KMT could divert public attention from its incompetence, while emulating Ma’s trick of controlling Taiwan by teaming up with China.

The cross-strait relationship is an external challenge that the nation has to face. That Chu would use it as the main theme for his campaign connotes his malice toward the public.

First, Chu decided to follow a vague party line within the KMT. On the one hand he rejected Hung’s straightforwardness, while on the other he is pushing Tsai to clarify her stance. Is there any justification to this?

This story has been viewed 2461 times.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top