Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker Chang Chun-hsiung (張俊雄) will become the next chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), a position that had been left vacant after the death of former chairman Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫).
After Premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) formally announced on Friday the Executive Yuan's decision to recommend Chang for the position, many people began to assess the implications of the move -- the most noteworthy being that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is emphasizing his desire to re-open cross-strait dialogue.
When Koo died, many commentators predicted that the significance of the SEF, along with its counterpart in China -- the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) -- would be permanently diminished. The SEF is a non-profit organization authorized by the Mainland Affairs Counsel (MAC) to handle cross-strait disputes and negotiations in the absence of official government contact between the two sides of the Strait.
The SEF is most often depicted as a quasi-governmental entity, since most of its funding comes from the Taiwan government and the MAC supervises and monitors its performance. But legally speaking, it is still a non-government, private entity.
The need for such an entity derived from the fact that Beijing is unwilling to deal directly with the Taiwan government, since that would suggest a recognition of its legitimacy. And at the time the SEF was formed, the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party was equally unwilling to deal with Beijing.
In the past few years, the SEF has been left out of the loop in negotiations on many important cross-strait affairs. A case in point was negotiations for cross-strait charter flights during the Lunar New Year holidays. The "official" negotiators were members of the aviation industry from the two sides. In reality, the attending government aviation bureaucrats did the real work.
But the model used for the Lunar New Year charter flights is only an ad hoc model. If Beijing remains adamant about refusing to deal with the Taiwan government, there will continue to be a need for quasi-government organizations such as the SEF and ARATS.
The appointment of Chang to head the SEF suggests that the Taiwan government still envisions that the SEF will remain a conduit for cross-strait negotiations. Otherwise there would be no need to appoint a political heavyweight such as Chang for the role.
Chang's record speaks for itself in terms of the weight he carries within the DPP. He has served as premier, as DPP chairman and as a senior lawmaker. He has also had a close relationship with President Chen Shui-bian (
After the Executive Yuan announced its decision to recommend Chang for the position, Chang immediately clarified his stance on the so-called "1992 consensus." He said that during the 1992 meeting in Hong Kong, representatives from the two sides of the Strait agreed to "leave aside the disputes, negotiate and enter into dialogue, solve problems, and respect each other," but that there was never a consensus on the "one China" issue.
Obviously, the "disputes" he referred to involve Taiwan's sovereignty, which remains the biggest point of disagreement between the Chinese and Taiwanese governments.
Unless China is willing to accept a similar pragmatic approach again, cross-strait relations may well remain at an impasse.
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