During the recent APEC summit in Bali, Indonesia, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) met with former vice president Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) envoy to the summit. Speaking about a timetable for cross-strait political negotiations, Xi emphasized that the problems caused by long-term political disagreements between Taiwan and China must eventually be resolved and that these problems cannot be left to future generations. Xi also said that leaders from both sides can meet and exchange ideas on cross-strait issues.
These are the most politically significant statements on cross-strait issues Xi has made since coming to power. Xi’s comments about how problems cannot be further avoided shows that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) authorities are extremely eager to start political negotiations with Taiwan. Also, Xi’s special emphasis on leaders from both sides being able to meet leaves a lot of room for us to imagine the possibility of a meeting between Ma and Xi at next year’s APEC summit.
The APEC summit is the only meeting organized by international organizations that Taiwan attends at the national leader level. As a result, when former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was in office, various approaches were attempted to secure chances for Chen to attend as Taiwan’s national leader. In 2005, Taiwan and China discussed the possibility of a meeting between Chen and former Chinese president Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) during that year’s APEC summit. However, because both sides were unable to come to a consensus on what “one China” meant in practice, Chen refused to attend as a regional representative of “Chinese Taipei,” and the possibility of a meeting between Chen and Hu vanished.
Now, the cross-strait political situation has gone through even bigger changes. In June this year, Ma authorized former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), during a visit to China, to accept Xi’s proposal of a “one China” framework. The Ma administration has kept on emphasizing the so-called “1992 consensus,” so much so that there is no chance of “each side having their own interpretation” of what that means. Judging from the way Siew mentioned the “1992 consensus,” while Xi only talked about the “one China” framework during the APEC summit, it is clear that the CCP’s stance toward “one China” is strengthening.
Ma’s low approval ratings and the doubts surrounding the illegal wiretapping scandal that pitched him against Legislative Speaker Wang Jyn-ping (王金平) have seen Ma once again lose badly here at home politically, and he has been forced to temporarily seek peace by backing off. However, given how obsessed Ma is with his legacy, we have to be extra cautious of Ma making abrupt moves when it comes to cross-strait issues.
The political implications of Ma sending Mainland Affairs Council Minister Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) along to the APEC summit are self-evident, just as the CCP’s attempts to organize a meeting between Ma and Xi during next year’s APEC summit have long been an open secret in both Taiwan and China.
However, the CCP is not giving away any free lunches and Ma is unlikely to recklessly sign a cross-strait peace agreement with China. As a result, the biggest likelihood is that the KMT and the CCP will use a joint declaration to reach an interim political agreement before the next APEC summit. When that happens, Xi will enter the next APEC summit as leader of “one China” with its protectorate called “Chinese Taipei,” represented by Ma. Once this happens, there will be no turning back for Taiwan.
Hung Chi-kune is a member of the Democratic Progressive Party’s Central Executive Committee.
Translated by Drew Cameron
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS