After his “election” as chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said it was his personal goal to create peaceful conditions in the Taiwan Strait. Pro-China media in Hong Kong praised his comments, while Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) sent him a congratulatory telegram in which he encouraged Ma to help foster the peaceful development of cross-strait relations.
In response, Ma asked Hu to “face reality,” thus contradicting past comments about “putting disputes aside” and breathing new life into long-avoided issues such as the existence of the Republic of China (ROC) and the recognition of Taiwan as an equal political entity.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) went to a great deal of trouble in responding to Ma’s challenge. First, CCP war hawk Wang Zaixi (王在希), deputy chairman of China’s semi-official Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, rejected Ma’s challenge in a roundabout way to avoid damaging developments in cross-strait relations. He did not reject Ma’s request to “face reality” directly, but did so by expounding on Hu’s concept of building mutual trust. Based on Ma’s goal of peace in the Taiwan Strait, Wang said mutual trust among political leaders was key to long-term cross-strait stability, adding that without mutual trust between politicians, there could be no mutual trust between the two sides’ militaries. Wang said that other problems could then be solved, including a formal end to cross-strait hostilities and the signing of framework agreements aimed at encouraging peaceful development. This was how Wang “faced reality.”
Reflecting on his conclusions after “facing reality,” he then said that Taiwan’s status must be based on the “one China” principle and the “1992 consensus.”
Wang’s comments did not stray from the views espoused in the CCP’s 17th National Congress in 2007. Even recent talk about framework agreements aimed at encouraging peaceful development were based on the political report from the 17th National Congress in which the CCP called for a formal end to hostilities in cross-strait negotiations, peace agreements, a framework for developing cross-strait peace and for creating a new environment for the peaceful development of relations based on the “one China” principle. Wang’s reiteration of these ideas was aimed at reminding Ma that peace must be based on mutual political trust and was in fact a call for Ma to “face reality.”
Wang said that Hu’s idea of establishing mutual trust was crucial to peaceful cross-strait relations and cited the first of Hu’s “new six points,” which state that it is essential to recognize that China and Taiwan both belong to China. Wang said the current lack of mutual trust, including doubts about China among Taiwanese authorities and senior officials, was the reason why Hu has placed the establishment of mutual trust above everything else. Such comments clearly show that the CCP still doubts the intentions and tendencies of the Ma administration.
The CCP has made it clear that the party has a bottom line that it will not ignore in cross-strait peace developments. Under these circumstances, it will be hard for Ma to unilaterally bring decades of peace to the Taiwan Strait, which therefore weakens the necessity of his doubling as party chairman. It could also threaten Ma’s legitimacy as president of the ROC if he were to meet the CCP’s standards for mutual political trust. Therefore, unless the CCP adjusts its stance, Ma will be in a serious dilemma.
Emerson Chang is director of the Department of International Studies at Nan Hua University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS