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.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS