至于中国方面最近紧缩「一个中国」的定义，在国际上封杀台湾，马英九承认，的确有这种状况。他主张，两岸可先以九二共识为基础，至少让双方有协商舞台，将来再就个案一个个研商如何处理，以互相不否认为目标。 [/quote]
Speaking at a conference in India, in response to a question whether he was seeking Beijing’s recognition of “Taiwan”, Ma responded by saying he wasn’t looking for mutual recognition… but mutual non-denial. He says that this is really the essence of the 92 Consensus, allowing both sides to offer their own explanation without making it necessary to reject the opposing one. Due to constitutional constraints on both sides, not at all possible to otherwise “recognize” each other.
MYJ admits that Beijing is pressuring Taiwan internationally on the basis of “one China”. He suggests that by having both sides recognize the 92 consensus as base, this at least gives both sides a stage for negotiation.
The following is from a post of mine a couple of days ago…
[quote=“mkegruber”]…does not even imply there was an agreement to disagree.
In my view, Ma’s angle should be something along the lines of, “when KMT returns to power, a lot will have change both in Taiwan and around the world. We will need to reflect on those changes and redefine who we are. Only then will we be able to resume a dialog with China to ensure a mutually beneficial outcome”.
[/quote]
I wonder is the KMT are now outsourcing or using open source methods for their speech writing.
You seem to be implying that Ma’s position is some how similar to yours. I, for one, don’t see it… well, except the general and rather obvious statement that “a lot will have changed both in Taiwan”. I don’t see any commitment on Ma’s side to “redefine” who the KMT are; I can define it for you right now, and it’s exactly what it’s been since Lien Chan landed in the mainland 2 (?) years ago.
Constitutional issues aside, hasn’t the government here long acknowledged the legitimacy of the PRC? I don’t see the ROC going around referring to “bandit-controlled territory” anymore.
Wouldn’t the result of this policy simply be a unilateral cessation of attempts to undermine the status of Taiwan by the PRC government? Why would they agree to that?
Constitutional issues aside, hasn’t the government here long acknowledged the legitimacy of the PRC? I don’t see the ROC going around referring to “bandit-controlled territory” anymore.
Wouldn’t the result of this policy simply be a unilateral cessation of attempts to undermine the status of Taiwan by the PRC government? Why would they agree to that?[/quote]
It depends on what you mean by the “status of Taiwan”.
Under the pan-Green position, China is equivalent to the People’s Republic of China, and Taiwan is equivalent to whatever this society/entity currently administered from Taipei is called. China and Taiwan are distinct elements, period.
Under the KMT position, China is not equivalent to the People’s Republic of China… it is either equivalent to the “Republic of China”, or some other ambiguous term that’s larger than the ROC (but not exclusive of it). So, what is the status of Taiwan or the Republic of China? It doesn’t matter; it is what it is. For Beijing, this is a very important concession.
Actually I am pretty sure you are living in my reality as well.
Actually, that’s my worst fear.
Let’s nail this down. Having mentioned that Mao is responsible
for the death of more Chinese than the Japanese I’m sure the
tanks will eat me too.
On an equally personal level ( I trust positive!) what do you expect to get
from the Communists if/when they subjugate Taiwan?
Were I you I would hold out for a Sultinate.
"On an equally personal level ( I trust positive!) what do you expect to get
from the Communists if/when they subjugate Taiwan? ",
as a teacher I say this-?- means an answer!