He also dismissed Ma’s remarks that the so-called “1992 consensus” led to the meeting between top negotiators in Singapore in 1993.
At a separate setting yesterday, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said it was unsuitable for the two quasi-official cross-strait agencies to negotiate anything concerning the political authority of the government.
However, she said it was necessary for the SEF to continue to exist because there were cross-strait affairs on the regular and technical level that needed to be taken care of.
The Presidential Office yesterday said the “best arrangement” at the current time was for the two agencies to conduct cross-strait negotiations.
Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said the office respected Lee’s personal opinions, but that the two agencies had accomplished a lot over the years.
Regarding the so-called “1992 consensus,” Wang said Ma was certain of its existence because he was the vice chairman of the MAC at that time. Thanks to such consensus, Wang said, both sides began negotiating with each other in 1992.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) yesterday also dismissed Lee’s denial of the “1992 consensus.”
Deputy Secretary-General of the KMT Chang Jung-kung (張榮恭) told a press conference yesterday that it was a conclusion reached by the SEF and ARATS on negotiations over the issue of “one China” in October 1992.
The SEF issued an official letter to ARATS and suggested that each side of the Taiwan Strait should have its own interpretation of the concept of “one China,” and ARATS said it “respects and accepts the suggestion” in its reply, Chang said.
“Lee Teng-hui had approved the SEF letter and had mentioned the gist of the ‘1992 consensus’ in a Double Ten national day speech in 1999,” Chang said.
Chang said that Lee, in his speech in 1999, had said that “each of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait had its own views regarding ‘one China,’” and that in 2000, Lee had said that: “We think one China means the Republic of China, while China regards one China as the People’s Republic of China. This is one China, with each side having its own interpretation.”
Both comments made by Lee showed that he had acknowledged the existence of the “1992 consensus,” Chang said.
Chang said the idea of the “1992 consensus” had long been accepted and had played a role in cross-strait negotiations.
RSS