Friday 14 November 2008
Deng’s call for ‘three links’ with Taiwan answered
Last week’s visit to Taiwan by Chen Yunlin, China’s chief cross-straits negotiator, is hugely significant. Four agreements were signed with his Taiwan counterpart, Chiang Pin-kung, providing for daily cross-strait flights, direct cross-strait shipping, better postal services and food safety. Almost three decades after Deng Xiaoping’s call for the establishment of the ‘three links’, meaning direct postal, transportation and trade links, it has finally been realised.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Deng’s call for ‘three links’ with Taiwan answered
By FRANK CHING
14 November 2008
Last week’s visit to Taiwan by Chen Yunlin, China’s chief cross-straits negotiator, is hugely significant. Four agreements were signed with his Taiwan counterpart, Chiang Pin-kung, providing for daily cross-strait flights, direct cross-strait shipping, better postal services and food safety. Almost three decades after Deng Xiaoping’s call for the establishment of the ‘three links’, meaning direct postal, transportation and trade links, it has finally been realised.
Mr Chen began his five-day visit to Taiwan on Monday and the agreements were signed on Tuesday as scheduled. This means that the two ostensibly non-governmental bodies, the mainland’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) and Taiwan’s Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF), had reached agreement before Mr Chen got off the plane.
Actually, much of the negotiating was done by the Chen Shui-bian administration but Beijing did not want him to get the credit and so delayed implementation until he had left office.
Mr Chen Yunlin’s visit to Taiwan was marked by protests and violence. The pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party, now in opposition, held massive demonstrations that turned violent to embarrass the Chinese visitor and the Ma Ying-jeou administration. On Wednesday, Mr Chen was trapped in the Grand Formosa Regent Hotel after dinner until 2 am because the hotel was surrounded by thousands of protesters. And on Thursday, Mr Ma had to bring forward his meeting with Mr Chen to the morning so as to avoid encountering massive demonstrations.
But why the protests? Since the agreements are on economic topics, why did the DPP mobilise so many people, busing many of them up from the south?
The simple answer is that they accuse Mr Ma of ‘handing Taiwan over to China’. If this were really happening, their anger would be understandable. But nothing could be further from the truth. Mr Ma has been accused of giving up Taiwan’s sovereignty because he used the term ‘Taiwan region’. But this is in Taiwan’s laws and constitution, which refers to the ‘Taiwan region’ and the ‘Mainland region’. This legislation and the constitutional amendment were adopted during the presidency of Lee Teng-hui and the term remains within the ambit of Taiwan’s constitutional framework.
That is why Mr Ma has said that the Republic of China’s territory includes the mainland, even though it currently does not control it. He is simply returning to the position adopted by the Kuomintang, in the past - a ‘one China’ position where the Republic of China, Taiwan’s formal name, is China and not the People’s Republic on the mainland.
Both the Chinese leader Hu Jintao and Mr Ma have talked about a peace agreement. Clearly, such an agreement would need to be very carefully negotiated and its implications studied. Beijing may well want to use such an accord to bind Taiwan to unification. But Taiwan’s negotiators can use their skills to formulate the peace accord to the island’s advantage. Nothing is set in stone, certainly not yet.
But DPP supporters are already loudly proclaiming a sellout of Taiwan, making irresponsible and inflammatory charges unsupported by any evidence.
Fortunately, most people in Taiwan don’t appear to have been taken in by such wild propaganda. According to a survey by the cabinet-level Mainland Affairs Council, close to 80 per cent of respondents said they were happy with the four agreements reached while over 75 per cent supported continuation of such negotiations.
Fear of a secret deal is behind DPP demands that all agreements reached should be ratified by the legislature. The Ma administration should consider this proposal. Since the KMT controls 75 per cent of the seats there is little likelihood that the legislature would reject the accords.
Democracy in Taiwan has reached a stage where no government can cut a deal with the Communists and impose it on the 23 million people on the island. That is the reality. However, it is still important for the Ma administration to make its actions and policies as transparent as possible.
This is especially important because, in addition to the ARATS-SEF talks, there is another channel that may be even more important: party-to-party talks between the Kuomintang and the Communists. A session is scheduled in Beijing next month. The talks reportedly will pave the way for the signing of a memorandum of understanding on banking cooperation during the next ARATS-SEF talks in the first half of 2009.
While it is understandable that the mainland may feel more comfortable with party-to-party talks, Taiwan’s democracy means that the party cannot replace the government. The SEF cannot be reduced to a rubber stamp to approve whatever agreements are reached by the two political parties.
The writer is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator
Post a Comment