Thu, Oct 27, 2016 - Page 1 News List

Hau urges end to ‘consensus’ quarrel

POWER GRAB?The KMT’s newly adopted cross-strait policy platform is an attempt by Hung Hsiu-chu to move the party closer to ‘one China, same interpretation,’ critics said

By Stacy Hsu  /  Staff reporter

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Central Policy Committee director Alex Tsai yesterday comments on former president Ma Ying-jeou’s office at a press conference before attending a Central Standing Committee meeting at KMT headquarters in Taipei.

Photo: George Tsorng, Taipei Times

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) yesterday urged KMT members to present a united front on the so-called “1992 consensus,” and cease the internecine conflicts that have driven a wedge between the camps of KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九).

“In the past, the KMT’s cross-strait policy, which centers on adherence to the ‘1992 consensus’ and the ‘one China, with different interpretations’ framework, had only been challenged by the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] and former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). Never before has it be a subject of contention within the KMT,” Hau said on Facebook.

With the approach of the Cross-Strait Peaceful Development Forum — which is scheduled to take place on Wednesday and Thursday next week in Beijing — it is critical that KMT members put forward a clear policy position and stop quarreling, the former Taipei mayor said.

The DPP’s difficulties over its stance on cross-strait relations demonstrate that the KMT’s cross-strait policy has been correct all along and that the “1992 consensus” and “one China, different interpretations” are vital to maintaining stable cross-strait development, Hau said.

“If even our own people reject that policy, we could lose the possibility of proving ourselves right through the failure of the DPP’s governance,” he said.

The “1992 consensus” refers to a tacit understanding between the KMT and Beijing that both sides of the Taiwan Strait acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means. Former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) in 2006 said that he had made up the term in 2000.

At the center of the altercation between Hung’s and Ma’s camps is the policy platform passed by the party’s national congress early last month that aims to “further” the “1992 consensus” and explore the possibility of signing a cross-strait peace accord.

Critics have said the new platform is an attempt by Hung to move the KMT closer to the concept of “one China, same interpretation,” as it only mentions the “different interpretations” aspect of the “consensus” once in the introduction as part of the party’s history and omits the term in the latter part of the platform, which sets out the party’s main policy.

Hau said that without having a united front on the “1992 consensus” and “one China, different interpretations” the KMT would be in no position to question the DPP’s cross-strait policy or promote interactions across the Taiwan Strait.

“Also, how can we discuss a peace accord [with Beijing] if there is no consensus among Taiwanese and our position is not based on the foundation of ‘one China, different interpretations?’” Hau said.

Despite Hau’s calls for party solidarity, KMT Central Policy Committee director Alex Tsai (蔡正元) later yesterday took aim at Ma’s office, which issued a statement on Tuesday urging Tsai to study history more closely to gain a “more accurate understanding” of the content of the “1992 consensus.”

“Who is ‘Ma Ying-jeou’s office’ anyway? It published a weird news release without leaving the name of its spokesperson. It is no different from a fake Facebook account,” Tsai said on Facebook, urging the office to look at itself in the mirror before giving him directions.

This story has been viewed 13735 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