Responding to media reports that the first formal round of negotiations on Taiwan-Hong Kong air links had broken down because of Taiwan's demand that the Civil Aeronautics Administra-tion (CAA) sign the agreement, the Mainland Affairs Commission (MAC) denied that the talks had collapsed, saying that the two sides had exchanged views on issues such as flight frequency and contract framework and that there would be a second meeting.
The development undoubtedly shows that neither side can afford to let the talks collapse as they concern the transportation needs of three million passengers per year and the substantial commercial interests involved in servicing those needs. It also, however, highlights the importance of the government's pragmatism in delegating non-governmental groups to conduct negotiations over cross-strait issues involving the exercise of government authority.
The existing agreement, signed in June 1996, was negotiated between Hong Kong airlines and a delegation formed by Taiwan's carriers under directions from government agencies such as the CAA and the MAC.
After Hong Kong's handover to Beijing in 1997, however, the MAC took charge of negotiations for the renewal of the links, in accordance with the Provisions Governing Relations with Hong Kong and Macau (港澳關係條例). Naturally, Taiwan's demand for a "government-to-government" negotiation model depends on whether Beijing will play ball.
Such political considerations have forced two six-month extensions of the 1996 agreement by way of "document exchange" instead of a new agreement.
As far as the possibility of a new agreement is concerned, I believe that the Taiwan-Hong Kong route is a major element of cross-strait interaction at a time when political obstacles stand in the way of direct transport links between Taiwan and China.
A new agreement is expected to involve additional flights for the carriers and, because both sides are under enormous pressure, a compromise can still be reached at the 11th hour. While I cannot predict how the political compromise will be struck, we can be sure that continued communication between Taiwanese and Hong Kong carriers will bring about a win-win proposal.
Because the two sides agreed not to disclose details of the negotiations, it is not possible to confirm whether the talks collapsed because of Taiwan's demand. In fact, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) recently said that Taipei could consider authorizing non-governmental groups to negotiate direct links, although the MAC later said that he actually meant that Taipei could seek assistance with direct-links negotiations from non-governmental groups.
There are precedents for the use of non-governmental groups on either side of the Strait to interact in a flexible and pragmatic manner and facilitate mutually acceptable agreements. Examples include the Kinmen agreement signed between the Red Cross societies, the signing of the existing Taiwan-Hong Kong aviation agreement and the "offshore shipping" model promoted by shipping associations from the two sides.
As long as it supervises the negotiations effectively, the government will ensure that the delegated organizations negotiate in strict adherence to its principles. This will also help to reduce concerns about belittlement, localization and marginalization.
All told, facing the rising demand for direct links, the government should continue to promote participation in negotiations by non-governmental groups. Such groups can help to lubricate the works of positive interaction across the Strait.
Tsai Horng-ming is deputy secretary-general of the Chinese National Federation of Industries.
Translated by Francis Huang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS