|
EDITORIAL: Ma’s peace
proposal worries public
At the opening of his national campaign headquarters, President Ma Ying-jeou
(馬英九) rebutted Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s
(蔡英文) criticism of his proposal for a cross-strait peace accord, wondering why
it was alright when she or former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen
Shui-bian (陳水扁) made such a proposal, but very dangerous when he made the same
suggestion. He then wondered if the reason was that his parents were
Mainlanders.
He is wrong, in his understanding, his attitude and the way he is going about
the peace pact.
It was alright for Lee and Chen because they used their suggestions to sound out
Beijing at a time when there were no stable relations between Taipei and
Beijing. However, today there are frequent exchanges between the two sides, and
many people even worry the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) will
override the government’s regular decisionmaking and supervisory functions.
Given the frequent cross-strait exchanges, how many people think it urgent to
resolve cross-strait military conflict?
When Ma asked how many people really knew what Tsai’s cross-strait policies
were, it was because both domestically and internationally, the biggest concern
over Tsai’s presidential bid is the question of how she would handle the
cross-strait issue. She has suggested the formation of a slightly vague and
visionary “Taiwan Consensus” and the gradual construction of a framework for
stable and peaceful cross-strait relations precisely because she wants to
strengthen her weak point.
Ma is different because his government’s greatest achievements over the past
four years lie in cross-strait relations. He and his team think the cross-strait
issue is their strong suit and Tsai’s greatest weakness, so they try to use it
to strengthen their position. However, this is a result of overconfidence. This
rushed proposal for a peace accord, followed one day later by a promise of a
referendum on the issue, displayed a carelessness and a complacency that gave
the DPP the opportunity to go on the attack and demand that the Referendum Law
(公民投票法) be amended.
Ma’s talk about “no unification, no independence and no use of military force”
makes it clear that he understands that the public favors the current “status
quo.” A peace accord may not be a dangerously rash move, but it is a big step
from a cross-strait relationship focused on trade and economic issues. Ma may
think this is a good time to test the waters, but the public seems to fear that
he wants to change the “status quo.” The fact that Ma is a Mainlander is one
factor affecting people’s perception of the situation, but the key here is his
longstanding support for eventual unification.
China clearly does not want cross-strait policy to blow up, and the Taiwan
Affairs Office was silent for days before its spokesperson, Yang Yi (楊毅),
responded that ending cross-strait hostilities and signing a peace accord were
in line with China’s overall interests, the common aspiration of people on both
sides of the Taiwan Strait and something China had advocated for years, adding
that it would be inevitable. He also said China would continue to prioritize
economic over political issues and simple over complex issues, and that what was
needed now was to focus on economic cooperation and increasing cultural
exchanges, although political issues would have to be dealt with sooner or
later.
Ma is trying to use talk about the “cardinal sin” of being a Mainlander to fend
off attacks against his peace accord proposal, but he will not be able to dispel
voters’ displeasure with China’s attempts to manipulate the elections.
|
