The Chinese Kuomintang Reform Commission recently proposed a new cross-strait discussion proposal, which did not mention adhering to the "92 Consensus" nor opposing "Taiwan independence." The entire discussion was ridiculed by the outside world as "just like the DPP." A spokesman for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council commented on this, "I hope that the Chinese Kuomintang will clearly distinguish between right and wrong and adhere to a proactive mainland policy. Public opinion on the island believes that the Kuomintang's move is self-defeating martial arts, questioning the abandonment of central thinking and cross-strait advantages.

 Follow the footsteps of the DPP

  The Kuomintang’s new cross-strait discussion proposal includes the so-called “four pillars” of “adhering to the sovereignty of the Republic of China, guaranteeing freedom, democracy and human rights, safeguarding Taiwan’s security priority, and creating a win-win and shared prosperity”, which expresses affirmation of the “92 Consensus” Historical contribution, rejecting "one country, two systems", and proposing that the mainland must face up to "the Republic of China" before there is cross-strait consensus. Taiwan’s “China Times” editorial bluntly stated that these propositions are “no different from the DPP”.

  In his first inaugural speech in 2016, Tsai Ing-wen once mentioned "affirming the historical contribution of the 1992 talks" in order to avoid accepting the "92 consensus" question. After a lapse of 4 years, Tsai Ing-wen no longer mentioned this old stubble. The Kuomintang even relied on the calabash and said, "The 1992 consensus was an important tool for seeking common ground while reserving differences in the past." The emphasis was also placed on "historical contributions."

  So should the Kuomintang stick to the "92 Consensus" in the future? The suggestion is silent about this throughout the proposal. Sun Wenshi, a veteran Taiwanese media person, wrote in the United Daily News that after reading the proposal, he did not know what role the "92 Consensus" had made, and would play a role in these "four pillars" in the future? "Or, does it exist?"

  The Kuomintang’s new discussion on both sides of the strait did not mention the Kuomintang’s resolute opposition to “Taiwan independence”. It only proposed that the mainland should face the existence of the “Republic of China”, let Taiwan participate in international organizations, and promote cross-strait human rights agreements. The DPP's appeal is to gather people's wisdom. No wonder the media on the island said that the Kuomintang’s cross-strait discussion proposal “would at first glance be regarded as a document of the DPP,” and “the trace of the DPP’s incense and worship is too obvious.”

 Blue camp rebounded strongly

  There was a huge rebound in the Kuomintang immediately. Kuomintang Chairman Jiang Qichen invited successive party chairmen to dinner on June 23, but former party chairmen Ma Yingjiu and Wu Dunyi did not attend the banquet. Recently, the former KMT Chairman Lien Chan, who rarely spoke out, also issued a statement on the 22nd, stating that the "1992 Consensus" can allow the two sides to seek common ground while reserving differences and put aside disputes. "It is enough to achieve peaceful development of cross-strait relations and expand Taiwan's international space. Its value cannot be denied."

  Hong Xiuzhu, the former chairman of the Kuomintang, issued an article on the evening of the 22nd, stating that if a political party considers the votes blindly, regardless of the party's ideas and central ideas, it will eventually be swept into history. The KMT should explain the core meaning of the "92 Consensus" to the outside world in detail, rather than letting the DPP stigmatize it.

  The Ma Ying-jeou Foundation CEO Xiao Xucen wrote that Tsai Ing-wen does not want the "92 Consensus", and the KMT has also lost it in a hurry. "Isn't this the DPP's most happy opinion?" The KMT fell into the DPP trap and put Originally, the good cards in his own hands were for fear of being thrown away, "What is left?"

  Gao Konglian, the former deputy chairman of the SEF, wrote that the two sides have held 11 talks on the basis of the "92 Consensus" and signed 23 agreements. At the same time, Taiwan can participate in the World Health Assembly, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Criminal Police Organization. The "92 Consensus" is not effective, and the new expositions on both sides of the Kuomintang cannot deny past achievements, and must be carried forward on this basis.

  Liu Dabei, member of the Standing Committee of the Kuomintang, criticized this cross-strait argument as he saw the "worst article" in the party. He did not object to the need for a new argument on both sides of the strait, but he could not deny the "92 Consensus" and could not follow the DPP, otherwise It will be called "Little Green".

  Blue Camp expressed disappointment with the performance of the Kuomintang. New Party Chairman Wu Chengdian issued a 10-point response saying that the "92 Consensus" not only has its positive contribution, but also an important indicator for maintaining peace across the Taiwan Straits, and a basic principle that should be pursued in the future. Pan Huaizong, a New Taipei City MP, said that if the Kuomintang abandons "one country, two systems" or does not talk about "one country, two systems", does the "one China" Kuomintang disagree?

  Faced with doubts from the outside world, Jiang Qichen urgently "extinguished the fire" and said that the cross-strait policy of the Reform Commission is only a proposal for discussion within and outside the party, not a final decision. Secretary-General Li Qianlong emphasized on the 23rd that the Kuomintang will not abandon the "92 Consensus", only how to discuss the issue.

 Pure martial arts

  Why did the Kuomintang’s cross-strait line move closer to the DPP? The media in the island pointed out that the Kuomintang is anxious to tear off the label of "pro-China selling Taiwan" and walk out of the shadow of election defeat. Whenever you lose, some people in the KMT will attribute the cause of the defeat to "not enough green." However, polls and elections in recent years all show that the closer the Kuomintang’s cross-strait policy is to the DPP, the weaker its momentum. The Kuomintang blamed the "92 Consensus" for losing the election, which was indeed the wrong prescription.

  In 2008, Ma Ying-jeou's "92 Consensus" defeated Xie Changting; in 2018, South Korea's Yu shouted "92 Consensus" and won the DPP stronghold Kaohsiung; in 2020, the KMT did not dare to say "92 Consensus" loudly, "General Election" "Full defeat. How can the Kuomintang come to the conclusion that insisting on the "92 Consensus" is not conducive to elections? The logic is puzzling. The "China Times" editorial pointed out that as an opposition party, the Kuomintang was unable to expose the contradictions and errors of the DPP, but went to review the "92 Consensus", which was equivalent to the default "92 Consensus" as a box office poison, indirectly unblocking the DPP, This is a serious strategic error.

  The Hong Kong China Review Service commented that the Kuomintang’s new cross-strait discussion proposal is “basically a self-talking disregard for cross-strait reality,” and the “92 Consensus” is a consensus that has proven to be effective and beneficial to both sides of the strait. The Kuomintang continued to circle around the issue of the "92 Consensus", looking forward and back, hesitating, and as a result turned its own strengths into inferiorities, thus continuously weakening its ability to handle cross-strait relations.

  The "China Times" commented that the DPP's "United States' resistance to China" has increased the potential risks in the Taiwan Strait, and Taiwan needs a political party that differs from the DPP's thinking to keep the mainland hopeful for "peaceful reunification." Lai Yueqian, an associate professor at Taiwan Practice University, bluntly stated that there is no "1992 consensus", how can there be peace across the Taiwan Strait? If the Kuomintang has lost its party spirit and party spirit, it has no future.

  In response to the Kuomintang’s cross-strait discussion proposal, Zhu Fenglian, a spokesman for the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, said that adherence to the “92 Consensus” and opposition to “Taiwan independence” are the common political basis for mutual trust, cooperation and cooperation between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Kuomintang. Policy, cherish and maintain the existing political foundation of the two parties, properly handle cross-strait political differences, and go against each other.

  Public opinion in the island pointed out that the Kuomintang’s internal struggles and internal layoffs are almost always beaten and not fought in the face of the DPP’s incursions. The defeat of the election should be based on its own reasons, rather than the ace of the “92 Consensus”. ". More importantly, if the Kuomintang abandons the "92 Consensus", how should it explain to the supporters of the Blue Camp, and where should the cross-strait relations and the welfare of the Taiwanese people be located?

  Reporter Wang Ping