Source: China Times

 

March 3, 2015

 

Sang Pin-tsai

 

The “1992 Consensus” and the “Taiwan Consensus” are two different concepts.  The former focuses on cross-Strait relations and, of course, contains the “Taiwan Consensus.” That is to say, the “Taiwan Consensus” is the foundation to discuss how to maintain cross-Strait relations with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)

 

Literally, the “Taiwan Consensus” is a consensus within Taiwan.  Tsai Ing-wen stresses the “Taiwan Consensus” and states that there is no “1992 Consensus.”  Tsai wants to delink the “Taiwan Consensus” from cross-Strait relations as a unique consensus within Taiwan.

 

In short, the “1992 Consensus” represents external relations and the “Taiwan Consensus” internal relations.  Using the “Taiwan Consensus” to replace the “1992 Consensus” aims at cutting off the linking points of cross-Strait relations, trying to support the belief that “Taiwan is Taiwan, China is China,” in other words, a zigzag version of the state-to-state theory.

 

Tsai Ing-wen has stated “Asserting Taiwan independence is a natural element for the younger generations.”  However, there are no specific figures supporting Tsai’s remarks.

 

Tsai Ing-wen lost the 2012 Presidential Election, but contended that she was “merely a mile away from success.”  Tsai’s last mile is generally considered to be the public’s lack of trust in Tsai’s ability to handle cross-Strait relations because her so-called “Taiwan Consensus” is hollow and vague.    

 

The outbreak of student protests on March 18, 2014 was the result of Tsai’s “Taiwan Consensus.”  The student protesters chanted the slogan   “Save Our Nation Ourselves (自己的國家自己救).”  However, by “Our nation,” did they mean the Republic of China (ROC) or the People’s Republic of China (PRC)?  They did not mean the ROC or the PRC because the leaders of the student protesters all supported the Taiwan independence movement.  Therefore, Tsai’s “Taiwan Consensus” was not in fact hollow because Tsai’s “Taiwan Consensus” was “Taiwan independence.”

 

Taipei City Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) mocked the “1992 Consensus” and said that the “1992 Consensus” could also be called the “2015 Consensus.”  Ko added that when he received guests from the Mainland in the City Hall, he considered them as foreigners.  Those who advocate Taiwan independence have established new political parties as the “Third Force” in Taiwan.  Those who have expressed their willingness to run in the 2016 legislative elections publicly stated that Tsai was their “hen.”  Should they be elected as legislators, they vowed to deny the existence of the “1992 Consensus” in the Legislative Yuan.

 

Recently, Tsai Ing-wen has attended activities hosted by advocates of the Taiwan independence movement and on the wall behind the speaker’s podium was the slogan “Establishing a New State for Taiwan.”  There were banners and flags in southern Taiwan calling on voters to support Tsai as the first female president in Taiwan.  Tsai Ing-wen reiterated that “When the DPP returns to power, Taiwan will be transformed.”  The Taiwan independence movement is shifting gears.

 

Many signs point to the same goal: the DPP will staunchly support the Taiwan independence movement.  After the KMT’s defeat in the November 9-in-1 local elections, voices calling for reunification with the Mainland can no longer be heard, nor mention of the “1992 Consensus.”  Tsai’s support ratings climbed after last November’s elections.  Tsai even stated that since the DPP achieved a great victory in the 9-in-1 local elections, 【Mainland】China would change their policy to accommodate Taiwan and the US would not be able to say anything about it.

 

However, many still believe that Tsai must clarify her position on the “1992 Consensus” and explain her “Taiwan Consensus.” Otherwise, Tsai would not be able to traverse “the last mile” to the Presidency.  If Tsai fails to explain her “Taiwan Consensus” to the public, she will lose public support.  However, others believe that Tsai did not need to explain her “Taiwan Consensus” because Tsai would gain more support if she kept her position ambiguous.  If Tsai believes that she would gain more support by keeping her ambiguity, she did not need to explain her “Taiwan Consensus.”

 

Tsai has been dubbed “hollow Tsai” and she would likely live up to her name in the future.  Although Tsai has not changed herself, she did change a considerable number of others.  It is foreseeable that support for the “1992 Consensus” will weaken as Tsai’s support ratings climb, but all people in Taiwan should be ready to face the consequences.