1992 concensus in the debate

Question/Anwer session between Ma and Hsieh

Hsieh: China has never acknowledged the so-called "`one China,' with each side having its own interpretation" concept. In fact, the Chinese Central Committee's Taiwan Affairs Office openly expressed its opposition to the idea on Aug. 4, 1999. I would like to ask Mr Ma to give an example of the endorsement of this principle by any high-ranking official or government agency in China. This is a question about facts because China condemned Taiwan for distorting the "`one China,' with each side having its own interpretation" principle.

I think he was doing well until he asked Ma to provide an example of the Chinese government endorsing the idea. Instead, he should have left it at the fact that the CCP does NOT endorse one China, two interpretations and asked Ma to just drop the "one China" idea given the obvious existence of both the PRC and the ROC.

Ma: The DPP can oppose the content of the 1992 consensus, but it cannot deny its existence.

A "consensus" involves coming to an agreement. These guys clearly didn't. You can't unilaterally declare a consensus. It doesn't work like that.

I supervised the case in 1992 as former vice chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). Our negotiations with China in Hong Kong did encounter some difficulties, but they did accept the "one China" principle after the negotiations. It can be found in documents, but the DPP has refused to acknowledge that fact.

That part's clearly true, but back here in reality there's clearly NOT one China of which Taiwan is a part of. And Hsieh is talking about this self-invented "two interpretations" part.

President Chen expressed his willingness to accept the "1992 consensus" during a June 27, 2000, visit by a group from the US, but former MAC chairman Tsai Ying-wen (蔡英文) denied the matter in a press conference less than 24 hours later.
The DPP knew about the existence of the 1992 consensus, but refused to touch on the issue of "one China." The Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT] was not afraid to discuss the issue because we know that "one China" meant "the Republic of China.

Coocoo!

Mr Hsieh, you would have to say that "one China" means the Republic of China if you are elected president.

No he wouldn't.

What are you afraid of regarding the issue of "one China"?

Who's afraid? It's just clearly fictional.

Why do you feel ashamed? China expressed its willingness to seek coexistence with Taiwan while accepting each side's differences and to negotiate on equal terms in 2005.
We can improve cross-strait relations step by step. We will send [representatives from the] Straits Exchange Foundation [SEF] to negotiate the issue with China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait [ARATS] and express our position.
The issue of sovereignty is difficult to address and we may not come up with the solution in our lifetime. However, we can still handle the issue by leaving it aside temporarily and focus our efforts on solving more pressing issues.

Accepting a precondition which essentially dictates eventual unification is not leaving aside the soverignty issue.