Help | Sitemap | Archive | Advanced Search | Mirror in USA   
  CHINA
  BUSINESS
  OPINION
  WORLD
  SCI-EDU
  SPORTS
  LIFE
  WAP SERVICE
  FEATURES
  PHOTO GALLERY

Message Board
Feedback
Voice of Readers
China Quiz
 China At a Glance
 Constitution of the PRC
 State Organs of the PRC
 CPC and State Leaders
 Chinese President Jiang Zemin
 White Papers of Chinese Government
 Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping
 English Websites in China
Help
About Us
SiteMap
Employment

U.S. Mirror
Japan Mirror
Tech-Net Mirror
Edu-Net Mirror
 
Tuesday, August 29, 2000, updated at 17:25(GMT+8)
Opinion  

'One China Principle Cannot Be Shelved': Commentary Stresses

The commentary, carried in the "Cross-Straits Relations" magazine September issue, which is run by ARATS, points out that ARATS and SEF reached a common view on adherence to the one China principle in 1992. This common view is based on the two formulas of expression put forward respectively by the two organizations at that time. The two formulas both expressed the attitude of adhering to the one China principle and pursuing national reunification.

The signed article titled "What controversy Is to Be Shelved?" says that on July 31, the leader of the Taiwan authorities made the remark about the "spirit of 1992", asserting that this spirit refers to "dialog, exchange and shelving controversy". His remark does not conform with facts, but rather it stealthily substitutes concepts, it puts the one China principle on shelve, distorts the spirit of the common view reached between ARATS and SEF in 1992, it actually wants to achieve the aim of negating the common view reached by the two organizations in 1992 and of refusing to recognize and accept the one China tenet. This is what we cannot accept. The one China principle cannot be pigeonholed.

The article cites as evidence the "Message to Taiwan Compatriots" written by Chairman Mao Zedong in October 1958, and the speech made by Vice-Premier Qian Qichen on January 26, 1998 concerning the one China principle, pointing out that the mainland of the motherland has demanded that Taiwan authorities uphold one China, what is to be upheld after all has always been very clear over the past decades.

The article says that there is no need for reticence, there is difference between us and the Taiwan authorities in their views concerning the implication of one China. However, the difference, no matter how big it is, should not become a reason for denying one China. No matter how the Taiwan authorities stress divergence, one core factor cannot be changed, i.e., China's sovereignty and territory cannot be separated. Although the two sides of the Straits have not as yet been reunified, sovereignty and territory remain undivided, the two sides are still one China. One China is a reality, it is not fictitious, but is a whole, Taiwan and the mainland both belong to one China. The core of upholding the one China principle is safeguarding China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The commentary points out that refusing to recognize and accept one China, evading serious matters and taking up trifles and avoiding real issues while dwelling on the abstract is the clearest expression of the lack of sincerity and goodwill. If the leader of the Taiwan authorities readily recognizes one China, both sides can immediately start negotiations. The mainland welcomes any effort to get closer to acceptance of the one China principle.




In This Section
 

The commentary, carried in the "Cross-Straits Relations" magazine September issue, which is run by ARATS, points out that ARATS and SEF reached a common view on adherence to the one China principle in 1992. This common view is based on the two formulas of expression put forward respectively by the two organizations at that time. The two formulas both expressed the attitude of adhering to the one China principle and pursuing national reunification.

Advanced Search


 


 


Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved