陳永峰:The ‘1992 consensus’ conundrum20160523

[Taipei Times]20160523

陳永峰(Chen Yung-feng is executive director of Tunghai University’s Center for Japan Area Studies.)

The People’s Daily, the official paper of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), recently published an opinion article which said that “non-recognition of the ‘1992 consensus’ would destroy the common foundation of the cross-strait relationship.”
China also played a dirty trick by asking the WHO to attach a proviso that Taiwan accept the “one China” principle in its invitation to attend this year’s World Health Assembly.
Beijing is attempting to pin down President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and make it more difficult for her administration to move Taiwan’s economy away from China and toward economies in South Asia.
As far as the leaders of the CCP are concerned, the mythical “1992 consensus” has already become close to a religion. They fervently believe that if there is no “1992 consensus,” then there can be no peace across the Taiwan Strait — and no further development of the cross-strait relationship. However, the “1992 consensus” is not an occult force; it casts no spell over Taiwanese. In post-modern Taiwan, this evangelical preaching from Beijing no longer stirs the hearts of Taiwanese.
However, politics is all about emotion: It is about moving people and then turning that emotion into a force in order to reach a predetermined political goal.
From a historical perspective, since the end of the Chinese Civil War, Taiwanese society has been structured around the Republic of China (ROC) and the ROC Constitution. However, the CCP has always remained firmly outside each of these two structures. Under the ROC system, the legal basis of its rule originates from China, when the ROC assumed power after the collapse of the Qing Dynasty.
The phrase “one China, with each side having its own interpretation of what China means,” was a constant refrain from the regime of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九); this was his government’s definition of the “1992 consensus.” In this phrase, the word “China” within “one China” refers to the ROC, which acceded to power following the collapse of the Qing Dynasty and was not completely replaced by the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
From the perspective of Taiwanese history, it is difficult to determine whether the ROC is “self” or “other,” whether it is internal or external to the structure of Taiwanese society, particularly today, as the conflict between a “conceptual” and a “tangible” China is prevalent.
However, what is clear is that throughout the development of Taiwan, foreign powers — “others” — who have developed a relationship with Taiwan, such as Spain, Zheng Chenggong (鄭成功, better known as Koxinga), the Qing Dynasty, Imperial Japan and even the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), have all contributed to the advancement of the nation before finally retreating in defeat. It is an incontrovertible truth that any foreign power which arrives on Taiwan’s shores eventually leaves with its tail between its legs. There is, therefore, no need for forceful resistance or expulsion of foreign powers.
As a consequence, the idea of “Taiwan” has historically never included the expulsion of foreign powers. Nevertheless, the more recent foreign powers which have come to Taiwan have expelled the foreign power that was already here on behalf of that conceptual Taiwan. At the same time, without exception, these foreign powers brought with them historically powerful forces of change to Taiwan.

For example, in 1895 the Qing Dynasty was defeated by Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War. However, through this event, Taiwan was able to free itself from the pre-modern Manchurian Qing and hitch itself to the wagon of imperialist Japan, starting off the modernization of Taiwan. In 1945, following the collapse of imperial Japan, Taiwan — a former member-state of the Japanese empire — avoided being classed as a defeated nation, and instead, through the KMT’s “liberation” of Taiwan, was able to become a founding member of the UN and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.
In 1949, after losing the Chinese Civil War, then-KMT forces and civilians retreated to Taiwan. However, the KMT’s defeat meant that Taiwan was separated from China and the CCP, thus allowing Taiwan to forge close links with the US, Japan and other Western countries of the free world. This gave Taiwan the benefits of rapid economic growth, democratization, constitutionalism and other modern values.
With this solid foundation, the course of Taiwan’s future development was always inevitable, and as expected, the KMT was eventually defeated at the ballot box, infusing Taiwan with a new energy and dynamism.
The security and protection of a state or a nation is based upon strategy rather than conviction; it is a question of cold, hard mathematics, not soft emotion. Whatever obstacles a nation faces, it should never cease to think critically.
As for the “1992 consensus,” Tsai should leave all options open and should never stop thinking.

0 回復

發表評論

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

發表迴響

你的電子郵件位址並不會被公開。 必要欄位標記為 *