HIS OWN IDEA?The DPP’s former chairperson Tsai Ing-wen said President Ma needed to explain whether Wu Poh-hsiung had clearance to make his statement
By Chris Wang / Staff reporter
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should explain to the public his view of the relationship between Taiwan and China after former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) made a controversial “one country, two areas” proposal in Bejing, former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said yesterday.
“It was a dangerous statement and if President Ma accepts that one country represents the ROC [Republic of China], then he needs to explain the difference between the ROC and the PRC [People’s Republic of China], and the relationship between them,” Tsai said on the sidelines of a digital teleconference, during which she talked with Chinese dissident Wang Dan (王丹).
Ma has been deliberately vague in his interpretation of cross-strait relations, she said, adding that he also needed to explain if the “one country, two areas” initiative was Wu’s own proposal.
Meanwhile, former premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) posted a Facebook message yesterday, saying that although the amended ROC Constitution did contain the terms “Mainland area and Taiwan area,” those terms delineated a special arrangement relating specifically to cross-strait exchanges.
“It was not a statement with sovereignty-related implications. The Constitution should be interpreted in a way that benefits people most,” Hsieh wrote.
DPP Legislator Lee Ying-yuan (李應元) echoed Hsieh’s view, saying that the Constitutional amendment was “only an arrangement of expedience.”
Ma should not have allowed Wu to make such a statement, Lee said, because he pledged during his re-election campaign that he would discuss major national and social issues with opposition leaders after the election.
Although Ma has reiterated that Taiwan’s future should be determined by the 23 million Taiwanese, DPP Legislator Pan Men-an (潘孟安) said that he was now making unilateral decisions and turning his back on the people.
Former DPP legislator Kuo Cheng-liang (郭正亮) said that he thought the DPP had shot itself in the foot with its opposition to the “two areas” proposal.
During the DPP’s eight years in power, he said, it had neither amended the Constitution and scrapped the Act Governing Relations Between the Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例) nor changed the existing cross-strait exchange platform between the Mainland Affairs Council and China’s Taiwan Affairs Office.
“Wasn’t that a tacit continuation and recognition of ‘one country, two areas?’” Kuo said.