AntiReport

Taiwanese media are reporting that, during the recent hotline talk between President Hu Jintao and President George Bush, Hu recognized 1992 consensus is that there’s only one China but both sides define it differently. (yizhong gebiao, “one-china-each-expression”). Chinese official Xinhua News Agency English service confirms this information through a report: CHINESE, U.S. PRESIDENTS HOLD TELEPHONE TALKS ON TAIWAN, TIBET . It says,

He said it is China’s consistent stand that the Chinese Mainland and Taiwan should restore consultation and talks on the basis of “the 1992 consensus,” which sees both sides recognize there is only one China, but agree to differ on its definition.

But funnily, no any Chinese language official reports in China echo this terminological breakthrough (http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/zxxx/t418529.htm). So Chen Ming-tong, Chairman of Mainland Affairs Council of ROC (Taiwan), urges Beijing to clarify this report in the public (and in Chinese).

Since a long time, Beijing has set the 1992 consensus as the precondition of the cross-strait negotiation. Whether this consensus exists and what is the content, however, become wars of words among Beijing, KMT and DPP. The pro-independence Taiwanese ruling party DPP denies the existence of any consensus in the 1992 Hong Kong-based cross-strait talk. KMT believes the verbal consensus is just yizhong gebiao, which means there’s only one China but both sides could define it differently, i.e. People’s Republic of China vs Republic of China, while Beijing believes the verbal consensus is so-called the principle of “One China”. In most occasions afterwards, China didn’t point out this China is People’s Republic of China. So many Taiwan issue experts name Beijing’s attitude as yizhong bubiao (one-China-no-expression), which means there’s only one China, but both sides don’t speak it out. Today, through English language diplomatic circle and media, Beijing accepts KMT’s version. This is a big gift to the Taiwanese president-elect Ma Ying-jeou.

The devil is in the details. What’s the difference between the gebiao (each-expression) and bubiao (no-expression)? When Beijing agrees to differ on the definition of “one China”, that means she recognizes Taiwan has its own unambiguous right to define it as Republic of China. ROC has become an antique term and only could be seen in the textbooks, research papers and historic sites, and is believed to be dead in 1949. Now, it comes back, though only in English language and only between the lines. So both sides, Beijing and Taiwan, or both languages, Chinese and English, differ on many things.

To be honest, I don’t really know what our president’s original Chinese words are during the Hu-Bush hotline. It’s weird that English becomes the only language to know the truth in this case. But for the bright peaceful future of  Chinese nation and Taiwan Strait, let’s practice English!