One ‘consensus,’ two views
In his New Year’s address, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) redefined the so-called “1992 consensus” to mean: “An agreement based upon the foundations of the ‘one China’ principle that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to ‘one China.’”
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) responded by saying that Xi’s version of the “1992 consensus” does not correspond to the consensus reached between the two parties at the time.
Wu said that the “1992 consensus” means: “one China, with each side of the Taiwan Strait having its own interpretation.”
This is an odd state of affairs. If a consensus really was reached between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party following talks in 1992, how is it that the parties’ leaders are now unable to agree on the wording? When did the consensus stop becoming a consensus?
For a consensus to exist, following negotiations, both parties must agree on a common viewpoint. That is what “consensus” means. Xi talks of a “1992 consensus” based on the “one China” principle, while Wu adds that the “consensus” is founded on each side being able to hold their own interpretation of what “China” means.
Xi and Wu’s idea of what the “1992 consensus” means clearly differ considerably.
However, this discrepancy also extends to differing definitions of the “1992 consensus” on Web sites on either side of the Taiwan Strait.
The Chinese-language Wikipedia lemma for “1992 consensus” defines it as “one China, each side with its own interpretation.”
However, China’s online encyclopedia, Baidu Baike, says that it is a consensus on the “one China” principle, which is adhered to on each side of the Taiwan Strait.
The Baidu Baike entry adds that the core meaning of “consensus” is that the “mainland” and Taiwan both belong to “one China,” and that the cross-strait relationship is not a state-to-state relationship.
As for local politicians, each has come up with their own twist on the meaning of the “1992 consensus,” although the Taiwanese public does not fully understand what it is and what it means. As the vast majority of the public, if asked, would be unable to explain what the “1992 consensus” means, how can it be asked to accept this poorly defined “consensus?”
When former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Raymond Burghardt met with then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) at an airport in Alaska in 2008, Burghardt said that according to his understanding, the so-called “1992 consensus” presented by the KMT does not actually exist. He was not wrong.
Hsu Li-te
Taipei
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies. As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect. Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way. UNACCEPTABLE Viewing the
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused