Tsai Criticizes “One Country, Two Areas” Now, But Used To Advocate “One Country, Four Areas”

Tsai Criticizes “One Country, Two Areas” Now, But Used To Advocate “One Country, Four Areas”

Source: United Daily News

Author: Chen Yi-hsin, former KMT Spokesman

March 26, 2012

Former DPP chairperson Tsai Ing-wen criticized Wu Poh-hsiung’s use of the phrase of “One Country, Two Areas” for putting Taiwan at great risk and demanded that President Ma Ying-jeou give an explanation to the public. However, Tsai seems to have completely forgotten that she had been the first person to advocate “One Country, Four Areas” in the past. Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), KMT honorary chairman, used the phrase when he met with Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) in Beijing on March 22^nd.

In 1993, Tsai Ing-wen and then Hong Kong University professor Byron Weng (翁松燃) headed a task force to draft a bill entitled the “Statute Governing Relations with Hong Kong and Macau (港澳關係條例)” for the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), and they at the time suggested that the government adjust its Mainland policy based on the concept of “One Country, Four Areas.” Tsai had stated, “The Republic of China (ROC) has special relationships with the Mainland, Hong Kong, and Macao. This is an existing fact which is undeniable. Using the concept of ‘One Country, Four Areas’ to handle the ROC’s relations with these three areas does not involve any subordination of sovereignty.” (See the China Times, June 17, 1993)

There appears to be two distinct Tsai Ing-wens. One is the DPP Presidential candidate in the 2012 Presidential Election, and the other one is the person playing the leading role in mapping out bill entitled the “Statute Governing Relations with Hong Kong and Macau” in the 1990s. Tsai had not only been a supporter of the “One Country, Two Areas” concept, but had also created the “One Country, Four Areas” concept. However, she now said that she thought the “One Country, Two Areas” concept was risky.

Tsai asked President Ma “What is the difference between the ROC and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).” She must have forgotten that when she served as MAC chairperson, she said, “The Republic of China is a sovereignty state, which cannot be downgraded, regionalized, or marginalized,” adding, “As a sovereign state, the ROC does not belong to the PRC.” (See United Daily News, August 6, 2002) she had clearly answered the question she is now asking President Ma, but, regrettably, she seems to have long forgotten her own answers.

Why is today’s Tsai Ing-wen renouncing her past convictions? The key is her flip-flopping with regard to the ROC Constitution. When she worked for the KMT administration, she was willing to recognize the ROC Constitution, and outline and even implement policies regarding cross-Strait relations and Taiwan's relations with Hong Kong and Macao. However, as the DPP Presidential candidate, Tsai Ing-wen refused to recognize the ROC Constitution, and had been unwilling to outline the DPP’s new cross-Strait discourse under the current Constitutional system.

Judging from this point of view, the public may rightly remain pessimistic about the project of “transformation of narrative” that the DPP intended to undertake.

Attachment : none