On March 21, singer-actress Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜) posted the following declaration on her Sina Weibo, Facebook and Instagram timelines: “I have always firmly believed that I am Chinese, and I firmly support the ‘one China’ principle.”
Her father, Ouyang Long (歐陽龍), spoke up for his daughter, saying: “No one in Taiwan could believe that I support Taiwanese independence. I am now a spokesman for the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT], and the KMT has always stuck to the basic line of the ‘1992 consensus,’ which says that there is only one China, with each side having its own interpretation.”
He also blamed the Democratic Progressive Party (DDP) for his daughter being forced by China to state her political standpoint, saying that this happened because the DPP had spoiled relations across the Taiwan Strait.
Some programs that Ouyang Nana appears in have been dropped from Chinese television stations over the past few months. This is said to be because of some things her father said as KMT spokesman, such as repeating former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) slogan of “no unification, no independence and no use of force,” and saying that “there is no consensus within the KMT regarding ‘one country, two systems.’”
These statements have been denounced as showing support for Taiwanese independence, and this has affected his daughter’s entertainment work in China.
Ouyang Long still blames the DPP and its supposed mishandling of cross-strait relations for his daughter’s exclusion from the airwaves. The interesting difference this time is that he did not criticize the DPP for not recognizing the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Why not, though? It must be because he is one of those pan-blue politicians who most keenly supports the “1992 consensus,” yet even his daughter is caught up in a witch hunt and is being accused of supporting Taiwanese independence.
What clearer proof could there be that the “1992 consensus” — in which both sides are supposed to have agreed that there is “one China, with each side having its own interpretation of what ‘China’ means” — actually never existed?
Just a short time before this incident, Xinhua news agency criticized President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for the things she has said about “preserving the ‘status quo.’”
Xinhua said that her statements have “two-states theory” undertones.
China’s official position has always been to stress the part of the “1992 consensus” that says there is only one China, with no mention of “each side having its own interpretation.” For China, there is no such thing as the Republic of China, nor any space for the existence of any other China.
It therefore goes without saying which China Ouyang Nana was referring to in her statement, or at least which China she would be taken to have meant.
China-friendly politicians are hiding their heads in the sand and dare not tell the truth. They disregard China’s malicious intent to annex Taiwan as they blindly chase after China’s non-existent goodwill. In so doing, they are pushing Taiwan toward unification.
China has laid its cards on the table, and it is obvious that the “1992 consensus” was made up to serve the “one country, two systems” policy. This is as clear as day, so Taiwan should stop mincing its words and reject China-friendly politicians who want to sell Taiwan down the river.
Chen Kuan-fu is a research student at National Taipei University’s law department.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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