Two-and-a-half years have passed since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) changed the name of the cross-strait trade and finance agreement, which was still on the drawing board at that time, from Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement to Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). Ever since then, the Ma administration has insisted that the ECFA is a purely economic agreement and does not involve any matters of sovereignty or politics. That was Ma’s rationale for not submitting the ECFA to a referendum — and the government turned down proposals signed by members of the public for a referendum on the ECFA four times.
Government officials and departments, including the Mainland Affairs Council, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the premier, the Presidential Office and others, have repeated the same narrative on innumerable occasions.
Following Democratic Progressive Party Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) refusal to recognize the existence of the so-called “1992 consensus,” Ma and his officials have changed their story. Now they say that it was only because the “1992 consensus” already existed as a basis — that is, a precondition — that Taiwan and China were able to sign the ECFA.
However, there is a clear contradiction between the two narratives. First, the government said the ECFA was a purely economic agreement and did not involve any political aspects, but now it is telling us that the ECFA was signed on the basis of the thoroughly political “1992 consensus.” This change of tack has stirred up quite a storm.
Was the Ma administration fooling the Taiwanese public with the story it told before the ECFA was signed last year, or is it the current version that is meant to pull the wool over people’s eyes?
The legislators who deliberated the draft agreement last year are still in their posts. So it is their responsibility to help clear the doubts from people’s minds by giving the public a proper explanation.
When they were inspecting, discussing and interpreting the text of the ECFA last year, did they realize that the ECFA depended on the “1992 consensus”? Did they exercise their power of consent as legislators based on such an understanding?
Considering the importance of the “1992 consensus” as a political condition, if the Taiwanese and Chinese governments held any form of negotiation beforehand, and if they agreed to take the “consensus” as the political basis for the signing of the ECFA, then the Ma administration is all the more obliged to show us a written agreement to that effect — one officially signed by both sides. That would help to dispel the controversy and it would demonstrate the government’s responsible attitude.
They must be disabused of the belief that it is enough to talk about such an agreement without presenting any proof, and then expect the public to accept a notion that appeared out of thin air and carries significant political risk for Taiwan.
If the government is unable to produce an officially signed document, then, given that the governments on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are unchanged, there should still be time for them to sign a retroactive agreement, though any such agreement would still have to be sent to the legislature for deliberation and retroactive approval. Ma’s Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) still has over half the seats in the legislature, so he should have nothing to worry about. Then the agreement could be officially incorporated into the ECFA.
Of course, no matter who forms the next government, they are likely to face a new wave of calls for an ECFA referendum, this time focused on the issue of its basis — namely the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Li Ching-lieh is a professor of electrical engineering at Tamkang University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Recently, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times’ sister newspaper) published three of my articles on the US presidential election, which is to be held on Nov. 5. I would like to share my perspective on the intense and stalemated presidential election with the people of Taiwan, as well as Taiwanese and Chinese Americans in the US. The current consensus of both major US political parties is to counter China and protect Taiwan. However, I do not trust former US president Donald Trump. He has questioned the US’ commitment to defending Taiwan and explicitly stated the significant challenges involved in doing so. “Trump believes
The government is considering building a semiconductor cluster in Europe, specifically in the Czech Republic, to support Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) new fab in Dresden, Germany, and to help local companies explore new business opportunities there. Europe wants to ensure the security of its semiconductor sector, but a lack of comprehensive supply chains there could pose significant risks to semiconductor clusters. The Czech government is aggressively seeking to build its own semiconductor industry and showing strong interest in collaborating with Taiwanese companies. Executive Yuan Secretary-General Kung Ming-hsin (龔明鑫) on Friday said that Taiwan is optimistic about building a semiconductor cluster in
China has successfully held its Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, with 53 of 55 countries from the African Union (AU) participating. The two countries that did not participate were Eswatini and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which have no diplomatic relations with China. Twenty-four leaders were reported to have participated. Despite African countries complaining about summit fatigue, with recent summits held with Russia, Italy, South Korea, the US and Indonesia, as well as Japan next month, they still turned up in large numbers in Beijing. China’s ability to attract most of the African leaders to a summit demonstrates that it is still being
The Russian city of Vladivostok lies approximately 45km from the Sino-Russian border on the Sea of Japan. The area was not always Russian territory: It was once the site of a Chinese settlement. The settlement would later be known as Yongmingcheng (永明城), the “city of eternal light,” during the Yuan Dynasty. That light was extinguished in 1858 when a large area of land was ceded by the Qing Dynasty to the Russian Empire with the signing of the Treaty of Aigun. The People’s Republic of China founded by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never ruled Taiwan. Taiwan was governed by the
RSS