Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Two heads are better than one

Despite a boycott by opposition parties, the cross-party task force on cross-strait affairs finally held its first meeting under the leadership of Academia Sinica president Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲), thereby launching another mechanism for the development of cross-strait relations. Taiwan's cross-strait policy has now entered the era of "one government, two systems."

In 1990, then-President Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) set up the National Unification Council (NUC) as an advisory body under the Presidential Office, despite the lack of a legal basis for such a group. The National Unification Guidelines that were drafted by the council were forwarded by the Presidential Office to the Executive Yuan for approval to become the basis for drafting cross-strait policies. As the DPP opposed the underlying aims of the council -- to pursue the goal of reunification -- it refused to participate in the group, thereby undermining any claim the council might have to enjoying popular support. Lee later discovered that a cross-strait policy based on the "one China" principle of the guidelines was unworkable, and as a result the council didn't meet for years. It became a specter, haunting the cross-strait process and dragged out into the light only when some chain-rattling was needed.

Although both the council and the guidelines were the result of wishful and illusory thinking, the dispute over independence versus unification and China's concerns about Taiwan's movements compelled President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to put aside any personal feelings -- he once said the council was as useful as an appendix -- and declare the continued existence of both the council and its reunification-seeking guidelines. Chen even agonized long and hard over whether to chair the council himself.

Most people still believe that Chen hopes to keep the NUC in its "spectral" form and establish another cross-strait policy-making body. Chen has said that the cross-party task force is "an independent advisory body for cross-strait policy" operating under the "consensus and integrated opinions from all corners of the nation."

It appears, however, that we currently have two bodies with almost identical remits -- to be advisory bodies to the president on cross-strait affairs. The council has a larger staff simply because it was the first-born; it also enjoys support from the opposition parties owing to its overt reunificationist agenda. Some people have suggested that lacking opposition support as it does, the task force is only an appendage created so that Chen would be able to return the favor he owes the Academia Sinica head for his support in the March election.

But from another perspective, the council's raison d'etre lacks popular support. The task force's role makes up for the council's deficiency in this regard. The unification guidelines' underlying assumption about unification ignores the existence and possibilities of other options, as Chen suggested last week. The task force can explore all possible options, including, but not limited to unification. It reinforces popular support for Taiwan's cross-strait policy, which is essential in the country's political democracy.

As neither independence nor unification is a foregone conclusion, the existence of both the NUC and the task force is necessary for now. They supplement and compliment each other, maximizing the possibilities in cross-strait relations and seeking the greatest common denominator from the popular will.

Cross-strait negotiations will have a concrete basis only if Taiwan hammers out a consensus among its own people and both bodies have a role to play here. The important thing is not to decide who is in charge or which body is senior, but rather what do the people of Taiwan -- whom both bodies serve -- want and how is this to be pursued. Otherwise, what does Taiwan have to talk about at the negotiating table with China, when it can't even decide which tune to play.
This story has been viewed 3318 times.