 |
Let's See Where Taiwan Authorities Will Go
Recently, whether or not to accept the one-China principle has become a focal point of political struggle in Taiwan. The Kuomintang, the People First Party and New Party have all indicated their stance that the cross-Strait relations can come out of the impasse only when the consensus on the one-China principle reached between the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) and the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) in 1992 is abided by.
The industrial and commercial circles in Taiwan have also demanded that the Taiwan authorities return to the one-China framework to grasp the opportunity for economic cooperation with the mainland, so as to get Taiwan's economy out of the predicament. The voice for "return to the one-China frame set in the constitution" has been uttered even within the Democratic Progressive Party.
This fact reflects that Taiwan's politics and economy have developed to a crucial moment: Whether to re-establish an environment and condition for rejuvenation and to walk out of the predicament; or to use up all the previously accumulated capital and sink in depravity; whether to accept the one-China principle and whether there can be a stable cross-Strait relationship-has become the key deciding on the future of Taiwan.
Regarding this, the Taiwan authorities still attempt to refuse to accept the one-China principle by an evasive method.
Annette Lu, who clings to a splittist stand openly clamors: One China is negotiable but is unacceptable. Acceptance of one China is tantamount to surrender. The "mainland affairs council chairman" Tsai Ying-wen who advocates the "two-states theory" claims: Taiwan has reached the "two-states theory" stage. Acceptance of the one-China framework would mean an eight-year retrogression of the cross-Strait relations. In that case, "the efforts made by the government in the past eight years would be destroyed in a moment."
It was against such a background that the "trans-party group", which is unworthy of the name, dished out so-called "three-faceted cognition" and "four proposals", which take the "two-states theory" as the keynote, to "respond to the 'one China' proposal made by the opposite bank of the Straits".
Recently, the Taiwan authorities hastily announced the opening of "three minor exchanges" on January 1, 2001 in an attempt to compel the mainland to reopen consultation between the ARATS and SEF. At the same time, Taiwan's new leader spread the rumor to the outside that "cross-Strait relations would not deteriorate in one year" in an attempt to continue misleading the general public of Taiwan and secure his position.
The main reason for the stagnation of the cross-Strait relations is that there exists the struggle between whether to uphold one China, or to cling to the "two-states theory". The contradiction between us and Taiwan authorities, and that between various opposition parties, industrial and commercial circles and most of the general public in Taiwan on the one hand and the Taiwan authorities on the other have stood out.
By far, instead of proceeding from the interests of the vast majority of the general public of Taiwan, giving up their original stand, returning to the one-China framework and earnestly improving the cross-Strait relations, the Taiwan authorities have been advancing carefully every step in their way, stubbornly stick to the separatist stand, play with political tactics, attempting to shift onto others the responsibility for the failure in improving cross-Strait relations.
There is only one China in the world, both Taiwan and the mainland belong to one China, China's sovereignty and territory brook no partition, China must be reunified. This absolutely admits of no challenge. Any underestimation of the firmness of the mainland's one-China stand is bound to meet with severe historical punishment.
Meanwhile, we have fully estimated that diehards obstinately clinging to a divisive stand often become self-possessed by depending on foreigners, self-contented by forgetting their forebears, wrongly judge the situation, refuse to give up until reaching the Yellow River and sometimes they refuse to stop even until they reach the Yellow River. We have never cherished any illusion about them. While doing our best for a peaceful reunification, we have also planned for the worst in our struggle against separation, we have determination, confidence, ability and way to cope with any eventualities.
Here we sternly warn the Taiwan authorities: Our current policy "hear your words and look at your conduct" is not a helpless policy, nor a policy of doing nothing. It is a policy of valuing the wellbeing of the entire Chinese people across the Straits, as well as a policy of treasuring the future of the Chinese nation.
If you are ignorant of the time and wrongly regard our good will and sincerity as a sign of weakness, continue going down the road against the will of the Chinese nation and isolate yourselves from the whole Chinese people, then yourselves are to blame for your bad end. On the cardinal issue of right and wrong regarding reunification and division, there has always been "good being rewarded with good and evil with evil".
In This Section
|