TOOLBAR Print Story Add Comments Email a friend Watch this writer

Font size:

Seoul, South Korea — In initiating his campaign for the next Taiwan presidency, Ma Ying-jeou, the ambitious Kuomintang (KMT) candidate, killed two birds with one stone: he gained the backing of the KMT and the New Party, and he stirred Beijing's anticipation of his future presidency in 2008. What might be more significant is a promise he made earlier that if elected president he would sign a 50-year peace pact with Beijing.

In contrast to the strong warning from Annette Lu Xiulian, Taiwan's "vice president" and member of the Democratic Progressive Party who said that Ma would be "dangerous" for Taiwan, Ma's campaign promise may be more than empty talk. There are sound reasons behind his boast.

Foremost, such a truce might benefit the triangular relationship between the United States, China and Taiwan. Keeping the present status quo unchanged accords with the objectives of all three concerned parties. For the United States, keeping Taiwan separated from China might suit its strategic policy in the Pacific, which swings back and forth like a pendulum with regard to the "China threat" concept. For China, this could halt Taiwan's drift toward independence, and more practicably, guarantee that no political disruption will mar the success of the coming Olympic Games. For Taiwan, it might put to rest worries over the island's identity and security.

Secondly, historical sentiments between the Chinese Communist Party and the KMT, which coexisted on the mainland prior to 1949, make them closer to each other compared to the DPP or other new parties established after that date. This was exemplified in the historic 2005 summit meeting between Hu Jintao and Lien Chan, when he was the KMT leader.

Despite their conflict during the civil war, the hatred between the two parties seems to have gradually dissolved with the lapse of time. The younger leaders of both parties do not bear the burden of old wounds, and their camaraderie may grow stronger with the deaths of the members of the older generation in the future.

What's more, both the CCP and the KMT have powerful motives to adopt a realistic strategy in cross-straits relations. For the CCP, maintaining internal stability is the key to legitimizing the party's hold on power. If a crisis with Taiwan emerged, the CCP would have only two choices: declaring war or abdicating power. For the KMT, returning to power would not only absolve the disgrace of losing the presidency eight years ago, but would also act as an incentive for resuming the pursuit of Sun Yat-sen's Three Principles of the People, or San-min Doctrine - ensuring national unity, democracy, and the people's welfare.

There might be further reasons for the signing of a non-invasion pact to ensure 50 years of peace, yet the above-mentioned arguments are enough to justify this imaginary scenario. If such a truce would serve the interests of China, Taiwan and the United States, why not advocate this course of action?

--

(Zhang Quanyi is an associate professor at the Zhejiang Wanli University in Ningbo, China, and a PhD candidate in Shanghai International Studies University studying policy making and collective identity. He is currently a research fellow at the School of International Studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea, under a grant by the Korea Foundation. ©Copyright Zhang Quanyi.)