 |
Taiwan's Denial of Consensus Shows Lack of Sincerity
China's Xinhua News Agency released a bylined article Monday making clear that Taiwan's denial of the one-China consensus reached between two organizations formed to promote cross-Straits relations shows the Taiwan authorities have no sincere desire to hold dialogue on reunification with the mainland.
In 1992, the mainland's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) and Taiwan's Strait Exchange Foundation (SEF) reached consensus that the two sides would express, in their own way, that "the two sides of the Straits both adhere to the one China principle."
The recent statement issued by the Taiwan Work Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council said that as long as the Taiwan authorities make a clear commitment that they will not accept the "two-states remarks," and that they will adhere to the consensus, the mainland will authorize ARATS to hold dialogues with organizations or persons authorized by the Taiwan side.
The statement fully demonstrates the mainland's sincerity for improving the cross-Straits relations and reopening the channel of communication between the two sides of the Taiwan Straits, the article stressed.
Unfortunately, some people in charge of Taiwan's mainland affairs have flatly denied the consensus reached by ARATS and SEF, while the new leader of Taiwan has purposely avoided the one China principle, the article said.
The denial of the consensus is not only inconsistent with historic facts, but also is a rebuff of the mainland's generosity. It's now become perfectly clear that the Taiwan authorities aren't sincere about improving the cross-Straits relations and conducting dialogue with the mainland.
The article related that in November 1992, ARATS and SEF reached the consensus and issued an oral statement that both sides of the Taiwan Straits adhere to the one China principle.
And in its document to ARATS, SEF said that in the joint pursuit of the country's reunification, the two sides should adhere to the one China principle in spite of their different understandings of what "one China" is.
The stance was widely reported by the media.
ARATS noted that both sides of the Taiwan Straits should abide by the one China principle, both should seek the country's reunification, and that the routine negotiations between the two organizations will not involve the political connotations of one China.
Despite their differences at the time, the spirit of the ARATS and SEF consensus was that both sides of the Taiwan Straits should adhere to the one China principle, the article said.
For years, the mainland has taken an unwavering attitude toward the one China principle, and the Taiwan authorities have also stated the one China principle in many of their official documents, including statements that there is only one China in the world, and that both the mainland and Taiwan belong to the Chinese territory.
The Xinhua article stressed that it was only because of the consensus that a series of negotiations became possible between the two sides of the Straits, including the talks between the heads of ARATS and SEF.
It's inconceivable that some people participating in the negotiations could publicly deny the existing basis for the negotiations. By doing so, they have not only obliterated the achievements of the negotiations, but also surrendered the rightful stand of the ARATS and SEF consensus, it said.
The Taiwan authorities should abandon the separatist stance of the "two states remarks" and accept the consensus that both sides of the Taiwan Straits adhere to the one China principle, now that the new leader has said the abolition of the "National Reunification Council" or the "National Reunification Guidelines" will not be an issue and leading officials said the spirit of reunification still exists.
Outright denial of the one China promise and attempts to undermine the basis of the cross-Straits negotiations will not only make any improvements in the cross-Straits relationship impossible in the foreseeable future, but also create new problems for the stability of the cross-Straits situation, the article noted.
In This Section
|