Sun, May 06, 2001 page3

• China `can't throw tantrums forever': Shi Hwei-yow

  Articulate, calm and witty, Shi Hwei-yow, secretary-general of the Straits Exchange Foundation, has represented Taiwan in dealings with Chinese envoys for the last decade. He helped to forge the `1992 consensus' that paved the way for formal contacts across the Taiwan Strait. Last week, he spoke with Taipei Times reporter Crystal Hsu on the impact of last year's transfer of power on cross-strait ties

  • /
  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taipei Times: How well do you think the government has done in its handling of cross-strait relations over the past year?

  Shi Hwei-yow (許惠祐): Cross-strait affairs appear to be an area of policy in which the DPP is less experienced in comparison with the opposition parties. With only a minority in the legislature, the government is having difficulty passing the bills it needs to fully implement its policy. The problem is compounded by Beijing's attempts to isolate the DPP. Against this backdrop, the government must give priority to preserving stability at home.

  

  Shi Hwei-yow, secretary-general of the Straits Exchange Foundation, talks to the Taipei Times about cross-strait ties during President Chen Shui-bian's first year in office. Shi says he doubts there will be any significant change in cross-strait relations before the December legislative elections.

  PHOTO: CHIANG YING-YING, TAIPEI TIMES

  To that end, it has to stay flexible. Unfortunately, the strategy is construed as lacking direction, resolve and consistency. As a result, the government has been unable to benefit much from its hard work.

  TT: Has the country's China policy undergone a major change in the last year?

  Shi: China policy has been characterized by continuity. Both parties find it better to tackle practical matters first and save political disputes for the future. Indeed, the country is not that divided on the issue except on the final solution. The KMT considers the two sides as equal political entities. The DPP advocates one China, one Taiwan. The New Party envisions a federation formula. But all insist on parity and embrace the idea of "Taiwan First."

  Given the KMT's dominance in the legislature, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), would never propose the "integration" theory. This and other conciliatory gestures made by President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) have all failed to appease Beijing. Today, it refuses to resume dialogue.

  TT: What advice would you give to the president on how to end the stalemate across the Strait?

  Shi: The government should avoid stoking debate on the issue, since it is a minority government. Chen has made minimal changes to national security staff, replacing a few deputy officials. So, the government is not suffering from a lack of old hands. Rather, the root of its predicament lies in the political domain. To increase their political clout, the opposition parties sometimes engage in tactics harmful to the collective national interest, for example by inciting public discontent against the government.

  A political problem calls for a political solution. The government should seek to secure a majority in the legislature, either by increasing its seats or forming a coalition. To me, foreign policy is an extension of domestic affairs. It also seems to me that the nation should develop a more mature political culture. In older democracies, opposition parties normally side with the government when confronting foreign forces.

  TT: How do you see cross-strait ties developing in the future?

  Shi: I am not as pessimistic as [other people.] In the end, Beijing has to deal with the DPP government. In a world of increasing globalization, neither side can afford any reckless move in the Taiwan Strait. China must accept the transfer of power in Taiwan. It can't throw temper tantrums forever. At this stage, it is more urgent for both sides to learn to get along.

  It's my guess that China's recent overtures to retired Taiwanese generals are linked to the US' sale of advanced arms to Taiwan. Instead of throwing another temper tantrum, Beijing has apparently opted for a milder approach. Also, China is likely to have a leadership reshuffle this fall, and Taiwan has national elections in December. I doubt there will be any dramatic twists in cross-strait relations before the dust has settled on those developments.

  TT: Will China adjust its wait-and-see tactic following the anniversary of Chen's inauguration on May 20?

  Shi: For Beijing to say that the DPP government is "on probation" is like "committing a foul." It makes no sense that one player should tell the other how to behave. To me, it is a delaying tactic, as Beijing doesn't know how to deal with the DPP.

  I believe the situation will remain as it is until Beijing finds a more effective, alternative approach. While the deadlock won't be resolved any time soon, cross-strait ties won't deteriorate any further.

  TT: Did Taiwan gain or lose from the recent series of diplomatic rows between the US, China and Japan?

  Shi: These clashes provided both opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, they helped elevate Taiwan's international profile. On the other hand, we had to be extra cautious lest China turn aggressive.

  In the wake of this series of incidents, China should abandon its parochial and simplistic mentality and reassess the role of Taiwan in the region, as the US and Japan apparently have done.

  We should view cross-strait ties as a multi-lateral game in which players cannot be branded as either allies or foes. There is an ample gray area. We should also develop a more innovative and diversified strategy while tolerating differences in the meantime.

  TT: Can the foundation continue to exert influence over cross-strait interplay in the future?

  Shi: Although there is no dialogue, there are continual exchanges. Now the Straits Exchange Foundation maintains only token contacts with China's Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait. After the 921 earthquake, for instance, it wrote us a letter to extend its condolences and we do the same when disasters hit China.

  I don't agree that China intends to marginalize the foundation. Rather it seeks to put pressure on Taiwan by boycotting formal contact. Beijing treats dialogue as a bargaining chip but we believe it is a way to counter mutual distrust.

  WTO membership, while helpful in effecting talks, is no panacea, because interactions will be limited to trade only.

  The foundation and ARATS (China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits) will still be needed in the absence of official links.

  WTO entry will call for more integration and coordination among government agencies, however, both horizontally and vertically. I presume the National Security Council will play a more important role.

  Some may think I have rather a lot of free time these days. As a matter of fact, the DPP government has frequently consulted the foundation. As a mediating agency, the foundation can handle any issues, including political ones, if asked to to do so. The SEF that helped to reach the "1992 consensus," which was highly political in nature.

  TT: Should the president accept the consensus in the hope of easing cross-strait tensions?

  Shi: It was I who led the delegation in talks with our Chinese counterparts in Hong Kong back in 1992. But I am not in a position to make statements that may have a critical political bearing on the government, especially about an issue so sensitive.

  The foundation's chairman, Koo Chen-fu (辜正甫), has said both sides should "honestly" honor the agreement. I think ambiguity is important in addressing cross-strait affairs.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Jokic’s 55 point pays off for Nuggets

  • 2

    China issues bounties for influencers

  • 3

    Pakistan to move T20 tri-series after bombing

  • 4

    Movie review: Russell Crowe and Rami Malek face off in the Nazi trial drama ‘Nuremberg’

  • 5

    China’s AI models pose risks, NSB says