The so-called “1992 consensus” was a verbal agreement between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It has already been shown that this agreement not only penalizes Taiwanese society; it is also playing a divisive role between different sectors in Taiwan.
The KMT regarded the so-called “1992 consensus” as an accomplishment when it was in power and, for a while, it did bring about some prosperity. The KMT would have been hard pushed to achieve the economic successes it did without Beijing’s support.
Having gorged itself on the best bits, the KMT left the crumbs for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Beijing is an expert at creating divisions between Taiwanese. It uses the “1992 consensus” as both a carrot and a stick, depending on what suits it at any given time.
As China becomes a highly capitalist country, the CCP is increasingly veering to the extreme right. Far-right fascism does not have to follow the logic of capitalism; nor does it have to respect the principles of democracy.
In terms of economic policies, the KMT has never come up with anything sustainable for the future. It just clings to Beijing for its political survival. The KMT’s policy has long been peddling deceptions, such as the “one China, different interpretations” to hoodwink Taiwanese.
To this day, Beijing has not made any comment on “one China, different interpretations.” When then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in November last year, Ma never once mentioned the Republic of China (ROC). Ma defended himself by claiming that he did mention the Constitution.
However, judging by the context of their conversation, Ma only quoted the Constitution to express his opposition to Taiwanese independence. He mentioned the Constitution in this way so that he could make himself more likable to Xi.
After President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was inaugurated in May, Beijing adopted a hardline stance, demanding that the Tsai administration recognize the “1992 consensus.”
The so-called consensus invalidates the existence of the ROC, pure and simple; the KMT just uses terms such as “one China, different interpretations” to deceive the public and, in so doing, gives Beijing the upper hand. The Tsai government clearly understands that a consensus that lacks written documentation to support its validity, as the “1992 consensus” does, is a political trap. Once you fall for it, you are doomed.
It is unreasonable to ask the DPP to bear the consequences of a deception manufactured by the KMT and the CCP. If it is Beijing’s belief that the “1992 consensus” should be acknowledged, Beijing should also recognize the existence of the ROC. Otherwise, “one China, different interpretations” is just a joke.
Criticizing Tsai for failing to thoroughly answer the question or castigating her for ignoring the “1992 consensus” is in no way pragmatic. If Beijing wants to interact with Taiwan, it has to open negotiations with the DPP and reach another consensus. After all, a consensus achieved by the KMT should not be the responsibility of the DPP.
Taiwanese voters have used their wisdom and votes to bring down the KMT. The public’s stance has been crystal clear: It cannot accept the lie that there is “one China, different interpretations.” The DPP took office with the public’s consent and so it cannot be ambivalent about Taiwan’s sovereignty, something the KMT used to do.
The meaning of power being in the hands of the public is quite clear. The public will is superior to any political party’s will; what the public chooses is a wise choice.
Beijing is using tourism as a political tool. When it wanted to endear itself to Taiwan, it sent hordes of Chinese tourists across the Taiwan Strait. Now it wants to penalize Taiwan, it has slashed the number of tourists allowed to visit. The Chinese public is just a tool of the CCP and tourism is just an extension of its control.
The tourism industry’s demand for Tsai’s recognition of the “1992 consensus” is tantamount to asking Taiwan to surrender to China. Taiwan’s transition of power signifies the principles of democracy. Tsai must not sacrifice Taiwanese democracy and give in to China, or the nation will lose 30 years of democratic achievement.
The “1992 consensus” is not what the DPP should be concerned about. What it should focus on is how to overcome adversity. The Ma administration was hijacked for eight years. If the DPP is going to allow itself to be caught in the same trap, why did we work so hard to achieve a democratic dream in the first place?
If Taiwanese want good things to happen, they should strive for them collectively, instead of passively accepting Beijing’s grace and control.
Chen Fang-ming is the director of the Graduate Institute of Taiwanese Literature at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Ethan Zhan
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs