status quo |ˈstātəs ˈkwō; ˈstatəs|
noun (usu. the status quo)
the existing state of affairs, esp. regarding social or political issues
On Ma becoming President in May 2008, the status-quo at the time was still the one that defined relations as 'special state-to-state'. By defining Taiwan as a region, especially by citing the trapdoor Act Governing Relations between the Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area [台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例], Ma changed the status quo and reduced Taiwan from a 'special state' to a 'region'. No word from the US on Ma's statement which could be in part attributed to the way Ma made reference to an Act in Law giving his statements a notionally legal base of defense, even if referencing a law that is a throwback of the early days of transition to democracy and one specifically designed to prevent democratisation leading to de jure independence for Taiwan. It, along with the Parade and Assembly Act were the legal mechanisms by which the china-centric core of the KMT sought to put in place restraints to change on core issues such as the identity and name of the country. Ma's Dec 2008 comments impacted directly on those issues:
“The relationship between Taiwan and Mainland China is not a state-to-state relationship,” Ma told a forum on constitutional interpretation held in Taipei yesterday.and ...
“Within the framework of our Constitution, I would define the Mainland as ‘Mainland region’ and Taiwan as ‘Taiwan region’ — this is what the Act Governing Relations between the Peoples of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area [台灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例] is all about,” he said.
Article 1 of the Act states that it was created to provide a legal basis for exchanges between the Taiwanese and the Chinese “before the unification of the country.”
The statute further defines “Taiwan area” as “Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, as well as all other regions under the rule of the government” and “Mainland area” as “territories of the Republic of China [ROC] outside the Taiwan area.”
Ma said another reason why he would not define the Taiwan-China relationship as state-to-state was because “according to our Constitution, we cannot recognize that there is another country on the mainland, which is part of the ROC.”
Ma said that his definition did not downgrade Taiwan’s sovereignty, as it was based completely on the Constitution and the statute.
“This view is apparently acceptable to everyone, since neither former president Lee Teng-hui [李登輝] nor the former Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] has tried to change the statute,” he said.
The relationship between Taiwan and China is not one between two countries, but a type of special relationship across the Taiwan Strait, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has told a Mexican newspaper, in a marked departure from former president Lee Teng-hui’s (李登輝) special state-to-state model of relations. “Basically, we don’t think the relationship between the two sides is one between two Chinas, but a special one,” Ma said in an interview with Sol de Mexico on Aug. 26, the Chinese text of which was released by the Presidential Office yesterday.
During the interview, the reporter asked questions in Spanish and Ma replied in Mandarin.
Ma said the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC) does not allow the existence of another country on its territory, nor does the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
“The relationship is a special one, but that relationship is not between two countries,” he was quoted as saying in the transcript. “While it is unlikely that double recognition of both sides of the Taiwan Strait can be obtained from any foreign country, we must maintain a peaceful and prosperous relationship with Beijing and at the same time we would like to see both sides enjoy dignity in the international community. This is our goal.”
Ma said that while both sides could not resolve the dispute of Taiwan’s sovereignty, Taipei and Beijing reached a consensus in 1992.
Under the so-called “1992 consensus,” Ma said each side accepted the principle of “one China” but agreed to have its own interpretation of what it meant.
While there were no immediate answers for the sovereignty issue, Ma said the government should not waste time and effort trying to resolve it. Instead, the government should focus its energy on more urgent issues that require both sides to attend to. Such issues were what his administration has been pushing, he said.
Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) said yesterday that the cross-strait relationship was not one between two countries but a special one defined by the 11th amendment to the ROC Constitution.
The article describes Taiwan as the “free region” and China as the “mainland region.”
Wang said that while Ma has redefined cross-strait relations and proposed to assert sovereignty and shelve disputes, Ma’s policy was not a concession or surrender. Although both sides have different claims over their territory and the disputes over sovereignty are difficult to resolve, Wang said the administration would protect the sovereignty of the ROC, insist on the “three nos” and continue to extend goodwill to Beijing.
Wang said the two regions are equal and have two ruling authorities whose relationship is not between the central and local governments but one that is equal between the “Taiwan region” and the “mainland region.”Again, the US made almost no comment on Ma's redefining the status quo of Taiwan's status via its relationship with China, but back in 2004 and 2006, when Taiwan-centric DPP President Chen tried to change the name of the Post Office, the US had plenty to say.
Here's the Taipei Times coverage of the issue:
Meanwhile, the State Department also said on Tuesday that it would not support the Executive Yuan's promotion of a campaign to rectify the names of Taiwan's state-controlled businesses.
Such steps would appear to unilaterally change Taiwan's status and to move Taiwan toward independence, US officials said.
"In maintaining stability in the Taiwan Straits, the United States opposes any unilateral steps that would change the status quo. The United States does not support Taiwan independence and would not support steps including changes of terminology for government controlled enterprises or Taiwan's Economic and Cultural Offices abroad that would appear to unilaterally change Taiwan's status," the officials said.
The Executive Yuan promoted the name change campaign as early as 2004, and then US State Department spokesman Adam Ereli reaffirmed the US' position of not supporting it.
"The United States has an interest in maintaining stability in the Taiwan Strait. That's what we want to see, and we are therefore opposed to any unilateral steps that would change the status quo," Ereli said at the time.My question here is did the last remaining vestiges of support for Taiwan in the US State Department die sometime around 2004? Did the US not oppose Ma's statements because he had only been in power for seven months and didn't want to embarrass him with the same rebuke it had used against his predecessor Chen? Did the US turn a blind eye because it predicted and tacitly supported the change to the status-quo that the Ma administration was making?
"These changes of terminology for government-controlled enterprises or economic and cultural offices abroad, in our view, would appear to unilaterally change Taiwan's status, and for that reason we're not supportive of them," he said.
