"To be honest, we still didn't have the experience of dealing with the Western 'public opinion war' at that time. We only wanted to write things accurately. At least I didn't think about how to write it catchy." Sun Yafu, vice president of the Cross-Strait Relations Association and former deputy director of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, told reporters with a smile.
This year marks the 30th anniversary of "1992 Consensus ". In 1992, Sun Yafu, who was also the deputy secretary-general of the Association for the Taiwan Straits, witnessed its birth throughout the process. Now, he can still blurt out the summary of the "1992 Consensus" by the Association for Going Overseas: , the Two Sessions and the Taiwan Straits Foundation) reached a consensus that each orally expressed that "both sides of the Taiwan Straits adhere to the one-China principle ".
He said that this summary is very accurate, and it sums up the subject, expression and meaning of the consensus in one sentence. But he also admitted that this sentence was too long and it was not easy for him to say it in one breath at the beginning. It is no wonder that many ordinary people would follow simple and easy-to-remember words such as "one China, each expresses itself" and "one China expresses itself". But these generalizations are inaccurate, because since all "consensus" has been reached, how can we leave the "distinctive" of the connotation of consensus?
He believes that if you have to give it a brief and catchy summary, it may be called "one of each form". He emphasized that the word "persistence" cannot be missed, because no matter how "everyone expresses", we cannot leave our adherence to the one-China principle.
In April 1993, Tang Shubei (left), executive vice president of the Mainland Association for the Sea of Taiwan, and Qiu Jinyi, vice chairman and secretary-general of the Taiwan Straits Foundation, held a road for " Wang Gu talks with ". Photography/China News Service Jia Guorong
"The situation is stronger than people"
Sun Yafu asked the reporter back, have you ever thought about why there was a "1992 Consensus"? He said that to understand the "1992 Consensus", we must start with two tragedies in July and August 1990.
In the early morning of July 22, 1990, several fishermen in Pingtan County, Fujian Province found the stranded fishing boat "Minping Yu 5540" on the beach. Both cabin covers were nailed to death by large iron nails. There were 25 bodies in the cabin and a dying survivor. They were private ferrymen who were repatriated by the Taiwanese authorities and died of suffocation in a narrow and sealed cabin.
One wave has not yet subsided and another wave has started again. On August 13, on the way to repatriate " Minpingyu No. 5202 ", the escorted warship collided with the fishing boat, killing 21 repatriated people.
Two tragedies occurred in less than a month, and public opinion on Taiwan was in a turmoil. The Taiwan authorities can only find ways to negotiate with relevant mainland authorities to resolve the issue, and the location was chosen at Kinmen.
On September 12, Le Meizhen, deputy director of the Exchange Bureau of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, signed a cooperative repatriation agreement (the "Kinmen Agreement") with the Secretary-General of the Taiwan Red Cross Society Chen Changwen , as the director of the China Red Cross Society. This is the first written agreement signed by the two sides of the Taiwan Strait authorized private groups to sign since 1949.
Le Meizhen said in an interview with a Taiwanese reporter that the current Taiwan issue is "a stronger situation than people."
Indeed, on both sides of the strait, the situation is developing very rapidly.
Starting from October 7, in more than a month, Taiwan has successively established three new institutions related to mainland affairs: the "National Unification Committee of the Presidential Office" (hereinafter referred to as the "National Unification Council"), the "Superior Yuan Mainland Council" (hereinafter referred to as the "Mainland Council") and the "Consortium Legal Person Straits Exchange Foundation " (hereinafter referred to as the "Strait Foundation"), which appears in the form of civil groups, forming a "one-whip" system from decision-making to execution.
In December, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China held a national work meeting on Taiwan. This is the first national work meeting on Taiwan since 1949, with Jiang Zemin, Li Peng, Yang Shangkun and others attending.
Deng Xiaoping once said that once Jiang Ching-kuo Once he dies, the key problem will arise. In terms of economy, "you have me and I have you", so that Taiwan's status will be stable. Tang Shubei, then deputy director of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, recalled that this meeting implemented Deng Xiaoping's new judgment and new countermeasures on the work of the Taiwan Strait, and actually adjusted the planning and deployment of the process of peaceful reunification of the cross-strait.
After this meeting, the Office of the Leading Group of the CPC Central Committee for Work and the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council merged, and , one organization, two brands, (the Central Committee renamed the Taiwan Affairs Office of the CPC Central Committee for Work and the Taiwan Affairs Office), with Wang Zhaoguo as the director.
Taiwan Affairs Office attaches great importance to the establishment of the Taiwan Straits Foundation. Although there were previously the "two-air negotiations" between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait in 1986 and the "Kinmen Negotiation" in 1990, it was caused by handling emergencies. Now the Taiwan authorities have specially established the only Strait Foundation that is authorized to interact and negotiate with the mainland. This is the first time, which means that the door for cross-strait negotiations is about to open. In order to deal with the Straits Foundation, the Taiwan Affairs Office established a new comprehensive bureau, with Zou Zhe as director and led by Tang Shubei.
Sun Yafu, who was originally working in the second group of the Central Taiwan Affairs Office, was transferred to the Comprehensive Bureau at this time and served as the director. He recalled that at that time, there were very few people in the General Bureau, only five or six people, but there was no separation.
Sun Yafu said that at that time, Tang Shubei considered that in order to avoid causing the problems of "two Chinas" and "one China and one Taiwan", he also provided a standard for the exchanges and negotiations between the two sides. He wanted to make something so that he and Li Yafei would draft it together. The document was later named "Five Principles to Follow in Handling Specific Issues in Cross-Strait Exchanges".
In April 1991, Chen Changwen, Vice Chairman and Secretary-General of Taiwan Straits Foundation, led a mainland visiting delegation " Bai Wai ".
On April 29, Tang Shubei met with Chen Changwen and his party at Diaoyutai State Guesthouse , and put forward these five principles in the conversation, which later Taiwanese media called "Tang Wujie". The "Tang Five Regulations" include implementing three links as soon as possible and facilitating direct negotiations between relevant parties as soon as possible. One of the core ones is that "the one-China principle should be adhered to."
Chen Changwen was a little surprised after hearing this. He said that the Straits Foundation is here to discuss matters and is not authorized to discuss political issues.
Sun Yafu was also surprised by Chen Changwen's reaction. The education he received before has always said that the Kuomintang adhered to the one-China principle. Even the people of the Straits Foundation have the nine words "Chinese, kind, and service" printed on their backpacks. Why are they unwilling to show that they adhere to the one-China principle?
In November of that year, Chen Changwen led the Straits Foundation to Beijing for the second time to conduct procedural negotiations on jointly preventing and combating crimes between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Under Tang Shubei's insistence, the two sides discussed the issue of adhering to the one-China principle in transactional negotiations. Chen Changwen agreed to write the "one-China principle", but insisted on adding the words "reciprocity and reciprocity" to reflect the meaning of "two reciprocity political entities". The efforts to reach a consensus have failed.
1991 was the peak period of emergency in the Strait, and frequent smuggling, robbery and fishing disputes involving cross-strait were required to strengthen communication and negotiation between the two sides.
Taiwan has always hoped that the mainland will also establish a civil society group corresponding to the Straits Foundation. When Chen Changwen visited this time, Wu Xueqian, member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee and deputy head of the Central Leading Group for Taiwan, met with him and told him that the mainland had decided to establish the Association for the Continental Association. Wu Xueqian said that some leaders of the Taiwan authorities repeatedly expressed their hope that we would set up such a group. We respect your opinions and established them, but we still adhere to our consistent proposition that the Kuomintang and the Communist Party should contact as soon as possible and discuss the issue of national reunification.
On December 16, the Cross-Strait Relations Association (referred to as the "Association of Continental Highways") was established. To this end, the Taiwan Affairs Office has established a new coordination bureau, which is specifically responsible for the work of the Association for the Continental Highways.
Coordination Bureau has few people, and they work with the General Bureau to work in . The director is Zou Zhekai, and Sun Yafu is transferred from the General Bureau to the Coordination Bureau and serves as the director of the Coordination Department of the Association for the Contingency.
Taiwan responded quickly. On the day of the establishment of the Association for Distribution and Development, Ma Ying-jeou, deputy chairman and spokesperson of the Mainland Affairs Council, stated that the establishment of the Association for Distribution and Development is a very pragmatic move. In the future, the two sides of the Taiwan Strait should follow the principle of gradual progress and solve the problems that can be solved first. He also said that the Straits Foundation does not have the direct task of "achieving peaceful reunification of the motherland" of the Association for the Straits of China and has no authority to deal with policy issues.
"They admit that they must adhere to 'one China'!"
Taiwan hopes to give priority to solving two urgent tasks, one is the verification and use of cross-strait notarization certificates, and the other is the inquiry and compensation of registration letters.
In late March 1992, Director of the Legal Services Department of Taiwan Straits Foundation Xu Huiyou came to Beijing to hold work talks with the Association for Discipline Inspection. The Association for Discipline Inspection participated in the research department Li Yafei and Zhou Ning, deputy director of the consulting department.
There are some technical differences between the two sides, such as providing each other with the types of notarized copies and fees, but the real crux of the problem is how to deal with the "one China" principle. The Straits Foundation insists on implementing "document verification", which is actually a reference to the practices between countries; it also insists that emails should be handled between Straits Foundation and the Straits Association, rather than directly handling by the postal departments across the Taiwan Straits, because "the situation is not yet the stage of direct postal communication."
Therefore, the Association for Discipline Inspection requires that the one-China principle be clarified in the agreement, or to indicate that it is "China's internal affairs." Xu Huiyou said that he was not authorized to discuss the issue, and that the one-China principle has nothing to do with the technical matters discussed.
The two sides talked for 3 days and were in a deadlock. The Straits Foundation called the Association for Discipline Inspection "added political issues" and unilaterally terminated the second phase of negotiations originally scheduled for the head of the Two Sessions to come forward to the main talks.
On March 30, Tang Shubei met with reporters from both sides of the Taiwan Strait and explained in detail the reasons why the one-China principle must be followed in the business negotiations between the two sides. After
, the Association for the National Taiwan Affairs Association summarized Tang Shubei's conversation into three sentences. The first sentence is that the specific issues in cross-strait exchanges are China's affairs and should be resolved in consultation with the principle of one China; the second sentence is that the political meaning of "one China" can be ignored in transactional negotiations; the third sentence is that the expression can be fully discussed and we are willing to listen to opinions from all walks of life in Taiwan.
"At that time, both the Kuomintang and the Communist Party held the position of one China, but they had different views on the meaning of one China. This is the deep-seated reason why the Taiwan authorities are unwilling to express their attitude towards adhering to the one China principle with the mainland. Whether this issue can be handled well has become the key to whether the two sessions can reach a consensus. At that time, the leader thought of a solution, that is, I would not discuss the specific meaning of 'one China' with you. Of course, not discussing it does not mean that I will not touch it in the future. Of course, it will have to touch it during political negotiations, but you can not discuss it during business negotiations. These three sentences contain the new ideas of the Association for the Association for Discipline Inspection, which actually solves the guiding ideology of reaching the '1992 Consensus'." Sun Yafu said.
Due to the insistence of the Association for Discipline Inspection, the two sides did not reach an agreement. Taiwanese veterans' handling of visiting relatives to the mainland, intermarriage of compatriots across the Taiwan Strait, adopting children, and inheriting property were all affected, which aroused the dissatisfaction of veterans. In this case, Lee Teng-hui asked the "National Union Council" to make suggestions after researching it.
5 In May, the "National Union Council" held a meeting to discuss, and most of the opinions believed that the one-China principle should not be included in the cross-strait affairs agreement at present. However, the "Regulations on Relations between the People's Relations between Taiwan and Mainland" that Taiwan is formulating has triggered a major discussion on "one China" on the island.
The China Times editorial stated: "In further cross-strait exchanges, how to define the connotation of 'one China' is an unavoidable issue." The United Daily News editorial pointed out that if the CCP avoids it because it proposes "one China" and is taboo, it will "lose its position as the CCP to win the position of China as the CCP." Wei Yong, a famous political scholar, said that if you think that accepting "one China" will make people misunderstand that we have accepted ", one country, two systems, and ", or it will make international people mistakenly believe that we have accepted the CCP’s representation in China. "This argument is too guilty and underestimate its ability to explain and clarify our position in the international community."
"National Union Council" held another meeting to study, and passed the resolution on August 1st. The
resolution has three points, the most important of which is the first point: "Both sides of the Taiwan Strait adhere to the principle of 'one China', but the meanings given by both sides are different. The Chinese Communist Party authorities believe that 'one China' is The People's Republic of China . After the reunification in the future, Taiwan will become a 'special administrative region' under its jurisdiction. We believe that 'one China' should refer to the Republic of China established in 1912 to date. Its sovereignty over the entire China, and its current governance is only in Taiwan, Penghu, Kim and Ma. Taiwan is a part of China, but the mainland is also a part of China.After the '8.1 resolution' was published, to be honest, I had a lot of opinions at the beginning. I said that if you talk about China, you will talk about the 'Republic of China'. How can you do this? "Sun Yafu recalled.
Adventure Association consultants were invited to discuss. Sun Yafu welcomed them to the conference room at the gate. He remembered that the chairman of the Central Committee of the Taiwan Democratic League Cai Zimin When he saw Tang Shubei, the first sentence he said was: "Shubei! OK! They admit to insisting on 'one China'! "
Sun Yafu lamented that this is a kind of political sensitivity and political judgment. He is really far from that of old comrades. "We also learned to seize something of you and I will 't' stop you. "He said with a smile.
"At that time, the Taiwan authorities recognized one China. This was a tradition passed down from Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Kai-shek in 1971. After Taiwan was expelled from the United Nations, they felt very awkward to talk about "one China", because the international community recognized that China is the People's Republic of China. Therefore, they gradually talked less, especially they were unwilling to talk with us. "He explained.
In order to respond to the "August 1 Resolution", on August 27, the head of the Association for Association of Foreign Languages made a conversation.
The first thing to do was affirm that the resolution clearly stated that "both sides of the Taiwan Strait adhere to the principle of one China" is of great significance to cross-strait negotiations, indicating that adhering to the one China principle in transactional negotiations has become a consensus between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait; at the same time, it also pointed out that "of course, I will disagree with the relevant Taiwan parties' understanding of the meaning of 'one China'"; and suggested that the two sides quickly resume and promote transactional negotiations based on this consensus.
"Stand this to save photos"
On October 28, the Association for Association of Foreigners and the Taiwan Straits Foundation reopened work negotiations in Hong Kong, led by Zhou Ning and Xu Huiyou respectively Talk.
Taiwan’s "National Security Group of the National Security Foundation" article "What is the "1992 Consensus"" disclosed that Taiwan realized that if the one-China principle is not handled, it will not be possible to break the deadlock and solve the problems that need to be resolved between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. After repeated research, they proposed five cases against the previous plan of the Association for Distribution and the Strait Foundation, authorizing the Association for Distribution and the Strait Foundation to propose them as appropriate during the talks.
These five cases contain contents of political differences between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and none of them were accepted by the Association for Distribution and the Association for Distribution. For example, the first case "the two sides are based on the principle of 'one China, two political entities'", and the expression of "two political entities" is unacceptable to the mainland. For example, the second case "the two sides are based on the principle of 'seeking a democratic, free, equal and unified China, cross-strait affairs are the affairs of the Chinese people'" , "Democracy, freedom, equal wealth and unified China" is actually proposed for "one country, two systems", while "Chinese affairs" avoids the expression of "China's affairs" with vague words.
The original two days have passed, and the talks are about to collapse again. At the request of the Straits Foundation, the Straits Association agreed to extend the period of half a day. On the afternoon of October 30, the two sides continued to negotiate.
Xu Huiyou proposed three oral expression plans. This was made by the Straits Foundation amending the first five cases based on their experience and experience in dealing with the mainland, and obtained the consent of the "Mainland Affairs Council". These three cases were dictated by Xu Huiyou, Zhou Ning recorded. When he could not remember them, he simply took the other party's notebook and copied it. After the record, the two sides checked again. Xu Huiyou also suggested that within the scope acceptable to each other in the Two Sessions, Each expresses it in a verbal statement. The third case (the eighth case) orally described by Xu Huiyou is:
In the process of joint efforts between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait to seek national reunification, although both sides adhere to the principle of one China, their perceptions of the meaning of one China are different. However, in view of the increasing frequency of cross-strait civil exchanges, in order to protect the rights and interests of the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, the verification of documents should be properly resolved.
After the negotiations of Hong Kong, the Association for Distribution and Interpretation of the Association for Distribution and Interpretation of the Straits Association believes that the case of the Straits Association shows the attitude of seeking national unification and adhering to the one China principle. Although it proposes that "there are different perceptions" of the meaning of one China, it does not specifically describe the meaning of "one China". Therefore, the method of shelving the dispute can be handled.
However, does Xu Huiyou's suggestion of "each oral statement" count? In view of this, Tang Shubei asked Sun Yafu, who was already the deputy secretary-general of the Association for the Prosperity of the Continental Association to make a call to Chen Rongjie, who replaced Chen Changwen as the secretary-general of the Association for the Prosperity of the Continental Association.
On the morning of November 3, Sun Yafu called Chen Rongjie and stated according to the telephone number approved in advance: The Association for Distribution fully respects and accepts the Straits Foundation's suggestions for verbally expressing the One-China principle, and the specific content of the oral statement will be negotiated separately.
After Chen Rongjie answered the phone, the Straits Foundation issued a press release on the same day and faxed the press release to the Straits Association late at night. The press release said that the competent authority agreed to the association's opinions on expressing the "one China" principle by oral statements. As for the specific content of the oral statements, they will be expressed in accordance with the "National General Program" and the "8.1 Resolution".
Tang Shubei considered that the other party should not replace the eighth case with a press release. In order to prevent "turning back on his face", it is necessary to make the other party's plan and the confrontation of the Association for Discipline Inspection and "establish this and save the photo."
The eighth case of the Straits Foundation is similar to the fourth case originally proposed by the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Party, the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Association for Union and the Party for the purpose of the Party for Union and the Party for the purpose of the Party for Union and the Party for the Party for the Party. However, in cross-strait affairs negotiations, the political meaning of "one China" is not involved. In this spirit, the use of cross-strait notarization certificates (or other negotiation matters) will be properly resolved.
On November 16, the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the Association for Distribution and Straits of the The letter was released to the outside world by the media on the same day.
Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council convened a meeting the next afternoon, focusing on studying the “motivation behind” letters from the Association for Discipline Inspection and finally decided not to reply to the letter, but Li Qingping, deputy secretary-general of the Straits Foundation, held a press conference to respond. Li Qingping delivered a conversation on behalf of the Mainland Affairs Council and the Straits Foundation, and welcomed the letter from the Association for Province.
On December 3, the Straits Foundation officially replied to the Association for the Straits, without objecting to the key points of the oral statements made by the Association for the Straits on November 16.
After that, both parties believed that they had reached a consensus. This laid the political foundation for the negotiations between the two sessions and also led to the successful holding of the famous "Wang-Gu Talks" in Singapore in April 1993. The talks signed four agreements including the " Cross-Strait Notary Use Verification Agreement " and the "Cross-Strait Registration Letter Inquiry and Compensation Agreement", and established a cross-strait consultation system.
"Cross-strait relations master switch"
self-evident. The birth of the "1992 Consensus" was not smooth, and even the emergence of this term itself illustrates the dilemma it encountered.
In 2000, before the arrival of "May 20" in which Chen Shui-bian took office, cross-strait relations were shrouded in a low pressure. At that time, Su Qi, chairman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, believed that the crux of the problem was still the "one China" issue.
He recalled that several US governments since Nixon have always used the word "one China", and at most they were given the suffix and called "our 'one China' policy". Friendly people advised Taipei not to challenge "one China" because it is like "one God". Su Qi knew that the gap between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait on this core issue will inevitably be even greater after the DPP came to power, but he felt that judging from the experience in 1992 and the following years, it is still possible to find a compromise that can be accepted by all parties.
After several days of thinking, he proposed a new term at an international seminar held by Tamkang University on April 28: "1992 Consensus" or "1992 Consensus", which is called 1992 Consensus in English. He believes that this term refers to the cross-strait easing experience, the tone is gentle, kind, and it is also sufficiently inclusive. As long as you say "return to the 1992 Consensus", everyone can get through it.
He believes that the issue targeted by the "1992 Consensus" is the most core, critical and difficult issue between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. In simple terms, it is a positioning issue, including self-positioning and mutual positioning. Because of this, this compromise is commendable and has made great contributions to creating and maintaining the stability of the situation in the Taiwan Strait.
He also said that although the "1992 Consensus" is lower than a treaty or agreement from the perspective of international law, it is undeniable that telecommunications are still a type of exchange of notes or letters, and are often used internationally. So the theorists can criticize it for not having a single file, but they cannot criticize it for not having a file, or having no consensus.
This month when Su Qi proposed the "1992 Consensus", mainland DPP research expert Xu Bodong was visiting Taiwan. When communicating with some people from the DPP, he said that Chen Shui-bian shouted the slogan of "Taiwan independence" before the election, and it is indeed very difficult for him to immediately change his words and accept the "one-China principle", but if he can propose "willing to resume consultation and negotiation with the mainland in accordance with the spirit of the 'National Unification Program' and on the basis of the 1992 consensus of the Two Sessions", based on his own judgment, although Beijing is not satisfied, it is barely acceptable and will enter the "watch its actions".
Xu Bodong didn't know whether Su Qi had learned his views and was inspired by some, but he felt that this could at least be considered a "coincidence" cross-strait consensus.
In the view of Zhao Jianmin, a professor at the Taiwan University of Political Science, the subtlety of the "1992 Consensus" lies in changing the highly controversial political connotation into neutral language. These four words are rare intersections in the decades of political turmoil between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and it is hard to get.
In 2008, after the Kuomintang returned to power, it returned to the track of the "1992 Consensus". In 2012, Ma Ying-jeou was re-elected for a row. This year is also the 20th anniversary of the "1992 Consensus". Ma Ying-jeou recalled at an academic seminar hosted by the Straits Foundation: "In addition to 72 words to explain its oral expression, the Association for Union of Taiwan also attached the 83 words of our letter to the letter to the letter. This can be proved that the 1992 Consensus is by no means oral or out of thin air, but is a letter and telegram exchange in black and white.
He said that the "1992 Consensus" should not be a political symbol, but a historical fact, which is fully in line with the provisions of the law and also takes into account the principles of exchanges between the two sides' reciprocity and dignity. He hopes that all walks of life will understand that it is the basis of cross-strait relations and the key to ensuring the peaceful development of cross-strait.
On the eve of the 2012 Taiwan leadership election, Taiwan’s United Daily News published an editorial saying that we cannot only see economic and trade interests such as ECFA, but also see the cross-strait peace dividends created by the "1992 Consensus" and the comprehensive benefits of the friendly environment to the overall political and economic situation. If cross-strait relations are compared to a gorgeous hall, then the "1992 Consensus" is the "main switch between cross-strait relations." When this switch is turned on, one after another light is lit one after another; denying the "1992 Consensus" is tantamount to turning the main switch off, and wanting the light to continue to shine.
Nowadays, the clouds between the two sides of the straits are blocking their sight. Perhaps, only by re-turning the on switch can we follow the Taiwan political scientist Zhang Linzheng, as said, goes to the end of the water and watch the clouds rise.
(Source: China News Weekly )
