Share this

Apr 16, 2008

A practical political question

Assuming that Chinas agree to Ma's "One China, Two Interpretations" framework (or at least agrees to ignore details beyond 'One China'), and again assuming negotiations start soon with economic agreements and perhaps even a political document following in the wake ...

What will the DPP do in 20012? Can they afford to abandon the "One side, one country" (一邊一國) formulation as a core value? Can they afford not to?

If the swing voters would otherwise prefer the DPP candidate, but fear some strong Chinese backlash -- including an end to any security agreement or special investment privileges -- will the KMT appear to be the only practical vote?

That is, will the agreements Ma is likely to achieve within one term lock even the DPP into a "One China" framework?

Alternately, will a competing "One side, one country" or "Sovereignty and Independence" (主權獨立) platform from the DPP drastically increase the likelihood of Chinese aggression now that the incoming KMT government will accept a "One China?"

4 comments:

STOP Ma said...

.
.
.
Believe it or not, I think this SHOULD be an easy one for the DPP to handle. But they must get the point across that the ridiculous notion that the ROC IS China is not satisfactory in any reality-based way. Furthermore, the fact that the two countries disagree with the MAIN PRINCIPLE can hardly be considered a "consensus". It defies logic.

So, in summary...

1) The consensus borders on fantasy.

2) The consensus is not a "consensus" at all.

Therefore, it should not be a basis for any political agreement between the two countries.

But the DPP have GOT to get these points out there now. Get them into the debating-circles pronto. The truth is on the DPP's (and Taiwan's) side.
.
.
.

Tim Maddog said...

Stop Ma is right. There can be no compromising on the reality of this situation -- that being that Taiwan and China are two separate countries which do not exercise governmental authority over each other.

His summary is also quite clear. "Differing interpretations" is the exact opposite of a consensus.

Tim Maddog

Tim Maddog said...

Update: I just heard Frank Hsieh in a clip on Talking Show saying pretty much the same thing I did in the above comment -- that Taiwan and China are two sovereign countries which do not control each other. Glad to see him on the ball!

Tim Maddog

阿牛 said...

I'm not asking about the reality. I'm saying how will the fantasy framework Ma puts into place affect the DPP's options, and the consequences of their choice, come 2012?