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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS