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
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,