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
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
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS