The Mainland Affairs Council’s Basic Position on the Formulation of a “Cross-Strait Peace Promotion Bill”
Cross-strait peace and development is the public consensus, as well as the government’s consistent position. Aside from Taiwan’s intentions and actions, Beijing should cooperate to make the establishment of peaceful and stable cross-strait relations feasible.
China has adopted every possible means in an attempt to reclaim Taiwan by using both hard and soft-handed tactics simultaneously. It has even irrationally enacted the “anti-separation law,” the so-called anti-secession law, to attempt to legitimatize and justify its use of force against Taiwan. The ruling and opposition political parties in Taiwan must calmly deal with China’s increasing hostility and consolidate internal consensus as soon as possible. This is aimed at eliminating a possible crisis once and for all. This is also the main reason behind the ruling and opposition parties’ promotion of a “Cross-Strait Peace Promotion Bill.”
Regarding the establishment of a set of proper mechanisms to consolidate consensus between the ruling and opposition political parties and promotion of cross-strait peace and development, we should abide by three major principles. The three major principles are principle of consensus, principle of public opinion, and principle of constitution.
The principle of consensus: The drafting of a “Cross-Strait Peace Promotion Bill” must be founded on a strong consensus among the people in society. If the contents of the “peace promotion bill” remain highly controversial, then the bill must not be forced through voting at the Legislative Yuan. This is also the basic political ethics that political parties and politicians must possess.
The principle of public opinion: If the “peace promotion bill” involves major issues such as the status of the country or the future direction of the country, then the decision of all the Taiwanese people must be respected. The people must not be deprived of their right to make the final decision on these issues.
The principle of constitution: If the “peace promotion bill” involves the establishment of institutions or organizations, then it should conform to the existing constitutional system and principle of separation of powers. The constitutional system and principles must never be sabotaged in any way.
The People First Party’s (PFP) version of the “peace promotion bill” has seriously contradicted the aforementioned three principles. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) firmly opposes and will never accept PFP’s version in order to defend the country’s interests and constitutional system.
In terms of the spirit, purpose, motivation and objectives of the bill as well as the system’s overall design, PFP’s proposed “peace promotion bill” can be said to be biased from the very beginning. Not only does it conflict with the existing constitutional system, government structure, and Taiwan’s policy toward China, but it also deviates from the mainstream public opinions of Taiwan’s society (see Articles 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 of PFP’s draft version of the “peace promotion bill).
Even if PFP’s version of the “peace promotion bill” is passed into law through a slight majority at the Legislative Yuan, it would still be unable to resolve cross-strait disputes, let alone create peace. The crux of the current stalemate in cross-strait relations lies in China’s repudiation of the existence of the Republic of China, its refusal to abandon the use of force against Taiwan, and its refusal to engage in dialogues with Taiwan’s duly-elected president and government. The opposition political parties must not take any action that dwarfs the sovereign status of Taiwan just for the sake of pleasing China.
If PFP’s version of the “peace promotion bill” is passed, it will still be unworkable, since it violates the constitution and undermines and conflicts with the government’s administrative system.
If PFP’s version of the “peace promotion bill is passed, it will be similar to a secondary law of China’s “anti-separation law.” Society will question whether Chinese factors have intervened in the legislative process and whether certain people have openly conducted China’s tactics of “using the public to threaten the government” and “using the opposition to intimidate the administration.” This is what has created the utmost anxiety among the people. PFP’s draft version of the “peace promotion bill” is aimed at arbitrarily promoting the so-called “1992 Consensus” and legalizing the “Four No’s Plus One” by interpreting it out of context. This is a very serious mistake.
If PFP’s version of the “peace promotion bill” is passed, it will signify the beginning of a terrible disaster. It will certainly cause serious conflicts between the political parties. Political instability, constitutional crisis, and social disintegration will also ensue. This would mark Taiwan’s misfortune and people’s woe. It is hoped that PFP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT) would think twice before they continue forward.