Taipei-Beijing relations have entered a new era marked by new officials in charge of cross-strait affairs as well as the unveiling of changing policy directions.
Symbolized by last month’s 20th anniversary of the summit between Koo Chen-fu, chairman of Taiwan’s Straits Exchange Foundation, and Wang Daohan, his counterpart from mainland China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, this new phase calls for bold, innovative measures addressing political issues and the establishment of reciprocal representative offices.
Chen Deming recently replaced Chen Yunlin as head of ARATS, while Zhang Zhijun earlier took over from Wang Yi as director of the Taiwan Affairs Office. In the second half of 2012, Lin Join-sane took charge of the SEF when Chiang Pin-kung retired, and Wang Yu-chi took the reins of the Mainland Affairs Council from Lai Shin-yuan.
In November the 18th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party affirmed that mainland China’s future policy would be to “put into full practice the important thought of peaceful growth of cross-straits relations, consolidate and strengthen the political, economic, cultural and social foundation for such growth, and create even better conditions for achieving peaceful reunification.”
This sort of discourse indicates that politics and economics will receive equal emphasis, in contrast to the former stress on putting economics first.
Remarks by ROC President Ma Ying-jeou since his second inauguration May 2012 indicate clearly that Taiwan’s main goal is to reinforce the current cross-strait peace while intensifying economic cooperation and people-to-people exchanges. Political dialogue takes a very definite backseat to economic collaboration, especially follow-ups to the Cross-Straits Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA).
The two sides may have found a common denominator, however. For example, Chen Deming said in his remarks upon taking office that the focus of talks at this point is still the deepening of economic ties.
But he did not omit mention of politics. Instead, adopting a flexible approach, he proposed supporting academic exchanges exploring political questions, as well as cross-strait private sector dialogue.
In other words, mainland China is not now applying pressure for political negotiations, but only pushing for an informal give-and-take. The several conferences regarding cross-strait political issues that have been held on the island this year by academic institutions from both sides could be seen as a positive response to this approach from Taiwan.
Such use of unofficial discussions in place of confrontational political negotiations is a very positive way forward.
Even more daring steps should be taken regarding reciprocal representative offices. The greatest advantage of such offices would still be the advancement of economic, social and cultural exchanges, for the mutual prosperity of people on both sides. But political concerns such as how their designations will reflect the “special cross-strait relationship” and how their functions will be distinguished from those of diplomatic institutions will be unavoidable.
If Taipei and Beijing can downplay political differences and concentrate on a functional design benefiting people on both sides in handling practical questions, representative offices could see the light of day in two years, a development that would be widely welcomed.
In addition to these issues, ECFA follow-up accords should be given priority by both sides, including agreements on trade in services and goods, as well as a dispute settlement mechanism, which should all be doable within a year or two. The world is watching to see whether these measures are actually brought to pass. (THN)
(This commentary originally appeared in the Commercial Times May 5, 2013.)