PrintRethinking Relations Across the Taiwan Strait
WASHINGTON -- The United States Institute of Peace, recently participated in an informal dialogue among leading experts from Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan on the risks and opportunities surrounding cross-strait relations. Convened by the Council on Foreign Relations, the meeting was entitled, "Rethinking the Cross-Strait Relationship," and was held over the weekend of February 10.
For more information regarding this event please contact Jessica Vander Salm, Communications Coordinator for the Council on Foreign Relations at (212) 434-9537. A copy of the convener's statement along with a list of participants is enclosed below.
Convener's Statement
The Council on Foreign Relations, with the support of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the United States Institute of Peace, convened a three-day dialogue on the subject of "Rethinking the Cross-Strait Relationship." The meeting was held February 10-13, 2000 at the Pocantico Conference Center in Tarrytown, New York. Mr. David Rockefeller, who welcomed the 31 participants at the opening dinner, hosted the event. The participants included 22 scholars from Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, as well as 9 Americans. The dialogue was conducted on an off-the-record basis to encourage frank and fruitful exchanges. A list of participants is attached to this statement.
General Brent Scowcroft delivered an opening keynote presentation to the group which highlighted, from an American perspective, the dangers and opportunities inherent in cross-Strait relations and the American interest in peaceful management of the situation.
While the event was not designed to produce a consensus document, the dialogue was sufficiently productive that the convener, with the acknowledgment of the group, decided to release the following statement prepared on the convener's own responsibility as a sense-of-the-meeting summary:
There was general concern with the deteriorating atmosphere across the Taiwan Strait. Despite clear and common interest shared by all parties in avoiding a return to hostilities, there was recognition of the dangers inherent in the increasing remilitarization of the Strait area and the decline in constructive dialogue. Indeed, there was a certain sense among some participants of an impending "Greek tragedy" in the current situation, where &endash; despite the overriding interest shared by all parties in maintaining a peaceful environment &endash; events seem to be moving almost inexorably in the direction of heightened distrust, lack of constructive dialogue, and possible military confrontation.
There was also a general sense that preoccupation with clarifying the meaning of such broad concepts as "state sovereignty," "one country, two systems," "special state-to-state relations," "self-determination," or even "peaceful coexistence" was proving to be controversial, as they had become highly politicized or were laden with emotion and burdened with historical baggage. Detailed exploration of such general formulae seemed to heighten disagreement or distrust rather than helping to identify common ground or dispel concerns. As well, excessive emphasis on reviewing history or clarifying the legal ambiguities associated with Taiwan's international status was found to be equally counterproductive.
At the same time, the participants also recognized that a number of current trends hold the possibility of helping to dispel mistrust and build areas of common interest. Moreover, impending political developments on both sides of the Strait hold the promise of opening a "window of opportunity," reinforced by substantial private sector cooperation across the Strait, in which far-sighted leadership could take initiatives that would stabilize and advance the current situation. The desire was for an approach that would avoid prematurely forcing issues and buy time during which areas of practical cooperation could be developed with the objective of gradually building confidence and mutual interest.
Thus, the discussion stressed the benefits of a forward-looking approach to dealing with cross-Strait relations. Although there was no unanimity on whether to accept as a basis for cooperation the ambiguous principle of "One China," there was consensus on the desirability of focusing on practical issues.
The participants identified an agenda of such issues affecting the interests of both sides of the Strait. These included:
- Improving cross-Strait contact, as by implementing postal, air, and sea communications.
- Recognizing that the impending membership of both the Chinese Mainland and Taiwan in the World Trade Organization (WTO) creates a new opportunity to advance and institutionalize cross-Strait trade and investment, and to improve legal protections for investors and business people.
- Advancing cooperative programs of environmental protection as both a cross-Strait and international interest and responsibility.
- Developing cooperation across the Strait to advance observance of international human rights norms, democratic governance and the rule of law, raise educational standards, and deal with pressing problems of public health and poverty.
- Establishing a dialogue on security issues affecting both sides of the Strait, including confidence-building measures such as the installation of a hotline.
Based on the generally constructive results of the dialogue, participants agreed on the value of convening issue-specific working groups, as well as follow-on meetings that would explore ways of implementing practical areas of contact and cooperation.
There was general agreement that early resumption of the Koo-Wang cross-Strait dialogue would serve the interests of all parties concerned.
The participants expressed hope that the Council on Foreign Relations and the United States Institute of Peace would continue to support the dialogue process, although there was also interest among the participants in bilateral contacts across the Strait.
Jerome A. Cohen and Robert A. Manning
Senior Fellows, Asia Studies,
Council on Foreign Relations
Pocantico Conference Center
Tarrytown, New York
February 13, 2000
Participants
Professor Jonathan Isa Charney
Vanderbilt University School of Law
Professor Albert H. Y. Chen
University of Hong Kong, Law Faculty
Professor Lung-Chu Chen
New York Law School
Professor Lung-Chu Chen
New Century Foundation
Professor Hungdah Chiu
University of Maryland Law School, East Asian Legal Studies Program
Dr. Patrick Cronin
United States Institute of Peace
Jerome A. Cohen, Esq.
Council on Foreign Relations
Professor Richard A. Falk
Princeton University, Center for International Studies
Professor Harry Hsin-yi Hsiao
University of Victoria, Pacific and Asian Studies
Ms. Bi-Khim Hsiao
Democratic Progressive Party
Dr. Fu-Tong Hsu
Taiwan Vision Council
Paul Hsu, Esq.
Lee & Li
Professor Qingguo Jia
Peking University, Institute of International Relations
Dr. Chi-Yuan Liang
Academia Sinica, Institute of Economics
Professor Tsung-Kuang Lin
Drake University
Dr. Tsung-Yi Lin
Taiwan Renaissance Foundation
Professor Bing Ling
City University of Hong Kong School of Law
Lawrence Shao-Liang Liu, Esq.
Lee & Li
The Honorable Ying-Jeou Ma
Taipei City Government, Office of the Mayor
Mr. Robert Manning
Council on Foreign Relations
Mr. Douglas Murray
Lingnan Foundation
Professor Jianming Shen
St. John's University Law School
The Honorable Richard Solomon
United States Institute of Peace
Professor Nancy Bernkopf Tucker
Georgetown University, Department of History
Dean Zhenmin Wang
Tsinghua University School of Law
Dr. Chien-Kuo Wu
Yale University, Council on International Studies
Professor Xinbo Wu
Fudan University, Center for American Studies
Professor Jiemian Yang
Shanghai Institute for International Studies, Department of American Studies
Mr. Peng Yuan
China Institute of Contemporary International Relations
Professor Donald S. Zagoria
The National Committee on American Foreign Policy
Dr. Hongjun Zhang
National People's Congress, Environmental Protection and Natural Resource Conservation Committee
Professor Lanye Zhu
East China College of Political Science and Law, International Law Department