This week is China’s annual meeting of the National People’s Congress + Political Consultative Conference. From a government point of view (independent of Communist Party events), this is the highlight of the Chinese political year. Budgets, plans, and goals for the next 12 months are laid out over the next two weeks.
It’s also a chance to highlight important policies. Hu Jintao did this by emphasizing, again, the Beijing position on cross-strait relations. This isn’t exactly news, but I get the feeling from some discussions that some stubbornly refuse to accept Beijing’s position has shifted dramatically over the past 5-10 years.
why use swords when you can defeat the enemy with words?
It’s cheaper and more cost-effective to win over the hearts and minds
the Taiwanese people… using the military is super-expensive and
counterproductive…
I don’t see what the difference is there from what China always says. I also don’t recall what Beijing’s “one China” policy states but I’d be a little bit surprised if it really does say that it’s “one China” is not the PRC.
Negotiations “on an equal footing” – as long as Taiwan kowtows to Beijing’s “one China” – nothing new there at all.
“Anything can be discussed, including Taiwan’s international space and unilateral disarmament.” Says who? This is patently bullshit of the highest order, unless of course your idea of a “discussion” is: “Please stop aiming missiles at us!”
“No. Fuck off.”
[quote=“Mick”]This is the sentence that got my attention.
Does that seem like China is trying to describe itself as something like a EU ?
Becasue if it were, that would allow for plenty of other member states to join, not just Taiwan. Or am I misreading it completely?[/quote]
Nothing to do with what China is trying to describe. Those so-called “bullet points” are just cctang’s imagination, they’re not from the linked Xinhua article at all.
sandman, if you mean this position is similar to what Beijing has said for the past ~5 years… you’re absolutely right. If you say this is what Beijing has always been, you’re completely wrong.
Beijing’s original “one China” (as articulated in every international venue possible over the past 3 decades):
there is only one China;
Taiwan is part of China,
this China is the People’s Republic of China, and the capital of China is in Beijing.
This new discussion is about a different China, entirely.
What Beijing is talking about today is, substantively, very close to what Lee Tung-hui wanted in the mid '90s. If we could reverse time, there very well could’ve been a political break-through if Beijing had moved to this position at that point.
Indeed? So whose is China then, according to you. And where is the capital? Links, of course, are required. Preferably something a bit less biased than Xinhua would be nice.
[quote=“creamypanda”]
I take a more cryptic position… China belongs to the world and the world belongs to China. [/quote]
Not that cryptic…isn’t that what the French/British were saying while they burnt down the yuanmingyuan…? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War
Eh, I don’t know. I’m pro-PRC in terms of Taiwanese relations, but even I acknowledge that what Hu said is purely semantics. Just spinning things in different way, but ultimately meaning the same thing.
What Hu said is basically the same thing many previous PRC leaders have been saying for decades, but in a hugely conciliatory and peaceful way.
Hu believes that there is One China, and the sole legal government of that One China is the People’s Republic of China.
Hu is able to claim that mainland China and Taiwan can negotiate on equal footing on any topics, because both are equal members of the One China. It’s like saying California and Texas can negotiate on equal footing about any topic, because they are both states (members) of the United States of America. No state in America is greater than the other. Likewise, no territorial entity within the One China is greater than the other. That’s why Taiwan (one entity) and mainland China as a whole (a group of entities) can negotiate on equal terms. Not sovereign-state-to-sovereign-state terms, but equal terms within the bounds of One China.
I think Taiwan should take the opportunity to negotiate now. No other Chinese leader has been this peaceful and willing to negotiate on this type of level. Although there’s no guarantee that negotiations will work, there is also no guarantee that future Chinese leaders will be this open to rational discussion and negotiation. Future Chinese leaders could be more belligerent and forceful. Take the time to negotiate and make sure that Taiwan gets as much as it can out of talks to guarantee as little interference from the mainland as possible.
I think it’s a historic opportunity for both sides and can pay dividends in the future in terms of political change on the mainland.
No… using your United States analogy, that’s equivalent to saying the California state government is the sole legal government of the United States.
So, in the traditional “One China” formula (which is still the standard language used when diplomats speak), the above is true: the sole legal government is the PRC. But what Hu (really started with Jiang Zemin) is offering is a different version, in order to move cross-strait relations to the next step. If Ma or Hsieh agrees with this format and negotiates some sort of an intermediate agreement… we’ll never seen or hear anything about this “sole” government nonsense again.
Well, as you can guess, in my case, you’re preaching to the choir.
I personally understand the hesitation amongst many Taiwanese whether the mainland can be “trusted” on being true to this. With that in mind, I’d certainly expect any progress or negotiation to be very slow, gradual, filled with non-political gestures initially. But hopefully, Ma will take the chance and start down this path very soon.
And because I will be at the Olympics, I’m really hoping Beijing/Taipei can work out something by then. I’m hoping Ma attends the opening ceremony (possible)… and I’m hoping that he’ll be allowed to wave a ROC flag (more improbable), just so that my wife can wave one too.
I wonder if Mr. Jintao actually has full control over China’s military…
(yes, I do realize it’s Mr. Hu, but I’ve been saying Mr. Jintao after
I saw a hot MSNBC female bimbo anchor using that term… )
[quote=“cctang”][quote=“creamypanda”]
I take a more cryptic position… China belongs to the world and the world belongs to China. [/quote]
Not that cryptic…isn’t that what the French/British were saying while they burnt down the yuanmingyuan…? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Opium_War[/quote]
And what were saying chineses, while killing, raping, burning, ‘genociding’ Tibetans?
[quote]The answer to your question is the result of negotiation, not the beginning of it.
One possible answer, for example: China has two capitals, one in Beijing, one in Taipei.
As far as “whose is China then”, Beijing’s version is simple: China belongs to the Chinese on both sides of the strait.[/quote]
Oh, I see. Nothing more than your imagination, then. Thanks for clearing that up. Oh well, we’ll see just how far off you are in your speculation in a few months when Hu starts talking with President Ma.
[/quote]
