Tue, Sep 27, 2011 page1

• Peace accord with China ‘naive’: DPP

  PLAYING WITH FIRE: The DPP said a peace treaty with Beijing would not ensure Taiwan’s security and that it was ‘unnecessary’ given that only one party — China — was hostile

  • By Chris Wang / Staff Reporter
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) intention to sign a peace accord with China is “naive,” the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said yesterday, adding that such an accord would be “unnecessary.”

  Ma, who is seeking re-election next year, plans to engage in political talks and seek a peace accord with China, Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) told then-AIT director Stephen Young in June 2009, according to a diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks on Aug. 30.

  While the Presidential Office has denied the contents of the cable, a growing body of evidence shows that Ma plans to address the issues of “a peace treaty, a formal end to hostilities and development of bilateral military confidence mechanisms,” DPP spokesperson Liang Wen-jie (梁文傑) said.

  Former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) both mentioned signing a peace treaty with Taiwan in their major statements in 1995 and 2008, Liang said.

  “However, both of them underlined that the negotiation would have to take place under the precondition of the ‘one China’ principle,” Liang said, adding that China’s insistence on the prerequisite has not changed during the past dozen years.

  The DPP’s position has been clear, he said, as the party does not think there are hostilities between the two sides — rather, it is China that is hostile to Taiwan — and that no peace accord, especially with the precondition of “one China,” was necessary.

  Ma has talked about signing a peace treaty, but he has “hidden the ‘one China’ principle from Taiwanese,” Liang said.

  At the same time, Ma was “naive” to believe a peace accord could ensure Taiwan’s security, DPP spokesperson Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) said.

  China signed a “peace treaty” with Tibet in May 1951 with a pledge to respect Tibet’s autonomy, but the People’s Liberation Army entered Lhasa five months later, Chen said.

  In addition, a peace agreement only exists between countries at war or between a government army and rebel military force, Chen said.

  “Relations between Taiwan and China are neither,” he said.

  If Taiwan were to sign a peace agreement with China, it would have to come with assurances from a third country and the international community, Chen added.

  While former US president Bill Clinton and Ken Lieberthal, who served in the US National Security Council during the Clinton administration, have both mentioned the proposal of a cross-strait peace treaty, they could not guarantee what would happen after the agreement, Chen said.

  Ma has made conflicting public statements on how Taiwan would engage in cross-strait negotiations, DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said.

  “He said the time was not ripe and then he said he had a plan [to enter political talks in his second term]. He said the talks would be held without prerequisites and then he said it should be conducted under the precondition of the so-called ‘1992 consensus,’” Tsai said.

  It was time for Ma to clearly explain his position to the public after three years in office, the DPP presidential candidate added.

  Responding to Chen’s comments, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Culture and Communications Committee Director Chuang Po-chung (莊伯仲) said Ma was proceeding with cross-trait issues in a peaceful manner.

  Regarding the DPP’s comments on the so-called “1992 consensus,” Chuang said the KMT has said many times that the consensus did not give up nor intend to downgrade Taiwan’s sovereignty.

  What Ma means by “each side having its own interpretation” was in effect “no unification,” while “one China” was “no independence” and love for peace meant “no armed conflict,” Chuang said.

  Cross-strait policies would have a heavy influence on Taiwan’s future and is an important policy for the nation, Chuang said.

  As such, it needs to be continually debated so the most acceptable version can be found, he said.

  Additional reporting by Jake Chung and CNA

  Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    German warships to pass through Strait

  • 2

    Sino-Russian air patrol designed to counter US

  • 3

    Court orders Ko Wen-je’s detention

  • 4

    Ko Wen-je release quashed

  • 5

    Travel warning issued over CCP Xinjiang efforts