|
Wu’s remark stirs
hornets’ nest
AMBUSH: Academics said that if the government
fails to explain what it means by its new concept, it will not be of any help in
cross-strait relations
By Mo Yan-chih / Staff reporter
Academics yesterday called for officials to put into context the latest “one
country, two areas (一國兩區)” cross-strait concept proposed by former Chinese
Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) in Beijing last week,
warning that the concept’s lack of context would make dialogue on cross-strait
issues between the government and opposition parties more difficult.
Taipei Forum, a think tank led by former National Security Council
secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起), which is touted as bipartisan, recently published
its policy recommendations on cross-strait policies, with the “one country, two
areas” idea emerging as the main topic of discussion among cross-strait experts,
including Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) spokesman Lo Chih-cheng (羅致政) and
DPP Legislator Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康).
Both Lo and Tuan challenged the timing and purpose of the concept, saying
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration had rushed through this latest
interpretation of cross-strait relations without communicating with opposition
parties beforehand or explaining the stance afterward.
“It is quite improper that the government failed to offer an explanation on what
this rhetoric means. If the government doesn’t take the initiative to
communicate with opposition parties on cross-strait issues and throws out the
[new] idea in a sudden move, it is like an ambush on opposition parties,” Lo
said.
The KMT’s sudden move, Tuan said, showed its lack of sincerity in discussing
cross-strait issues with the DPP, while the lack of explanation as to the
meaning of the new interpretation has confused the public.
Wu introduced the “one country, two areas” rhetoric during his meeting with
Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) in Beijing on Thursday last week. During the
meeting, which was the highlight of the annual forum between the KMT and the
Chinese Communist Party, Wu touted the “one country, two areas” concept as a way
to improve cross-strait ties.
In response to immediate criticism of the concept, with opposition parties
calling it a step toward unification, the Presidential Office on Friday said the
Ma administration would continue to handle cross-strait relations under the
principle of “one China,” meaning the Republic of China (ROC).
Presenting a report on cross-strait policy at the forum, Yang Kai-huang (楊開煌), a
public affairs professor at Ming Chuan University, said there was little context
within which one could place the “one country, two regions” idea, adding that
the government would make little progress in its interactions with opposition
parties if it failed to discuss the issue further.
“The rhetoric lacks a comprehensive context and we do not see any attempts from
the government to promote the concept. It seems that the government is only
throwing out the issue to test the [political] waters,” he said.
Yang also said the government should break away from what he called a “one and
two” rhetoric — from “one country, two systems” to “one country, two areas” —
and called for the development of a new perspective on cross-strait relations.
National Chengchi University professor Chao Chien-min (趙建民) said the “one
country, two areas” concept should help both sides of the Strait come to terms
with reality, but added that they should focus on finding more common ground on
cross-strait definitions to normalize exchanges, rather than focusing on issues
of “de facto sovereignty” or “de jure sovereignty.”
Lin Wen-cheng (林文程), a professor at the Institute of China and Asia-Pacific
Studies at National Sun Yat-Sen University, urged the Ma administration not to
dodge the issue of cross-strait political negotiations.
“Taiwan’s ‘status quo’ cannot last forever, and we must prepare for political
negotiations. Cross-strait negotiations on economy and trade will continue, but
such negotiations will be more and more difficult, as China will ask for more
concessions from Taiwan,” he said.
|
