Three key phrases that every member of the world community should know and be able to explain when discussing Taiwan-China cross-strait affairs are the following: status quo, the "1992 consensus" and the National Unification Council and guidelines.
To facilitate this, the following excerpts from a hypothetical Dummy's Guide to Understanding Taiwan-China Cross-Strait Phraseology are provided below.
First the status quo. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Like all things that Ma says, one should never examine them too closely. If the status quo were the color white, for China it would be red; for the USA it would be blue; and for the KMT it would be red with some blue, while it is green for the Democratic Progressive Party. We all know that white is white, but don't let that bother you, because we are all still one big, happy family.
Next there is the "1992 consensus." Again Ma succinctly hits the nail on the head: "All sides should return to the `1992 consensus' and we will all be one big, happy family."
Of course a few minor details have been left out.
First there never was a consensus; former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (
Second, even though the topic was discussed by both sides, neither Taiwan nor China wanted to sign off on it.
Third, the non-KMT majority of Taiwan was not consulted on this.
Fourth, since no one can express what the never-achieved consensus was, we should defer to the status quo mentioned above.
Thus by returning to the consensus of 1992 we will all still be one big, happy family.
Finally there are the National Unification Guidelines. President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has mothballed them as useless. Ma disagreed, saying that they are symbolically useful and that by keeping them we will all be one big, happy family.
However, there are some glitches.
First, the Taiwanese were not consulted when the KMT came up with the guidelines in 1991.
Second, China never agreed with the guidelines when the KMT created them.
Third, China has continuously violated the guidelines by deploying missiles and working to obstruct Taiwan from joining international organizations and participating in international activities.
Fourth, the only word in the guidelines that China likes is the word "unification."
Fifth, contrary to what happens in practice, the real goal of the guidelines was the establishment of a democratic, free and equitably prosperous China.
Forget about all that, Ma has enough trouble with the word "democracy" when talking with China anyway. So he states that the National Unification Guidelines should be kept.
Now that you understand the three essential phrases related to cross-strait affairs, memorize them and begin using them. In this way, all sides and parties involved will remain one big, happy family.
Of course I should mention that what each side and each party involved mean by one, and what they mean by big, and what they mean by happy and what they mean by family are totally different and have contradictory meanings. Nevertheless, don't let that put you off, just follow the decisive lead set by Ma. We are all still one big happy family. Understand?
Jerome Keating is a Taiwan-based writer.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS