KMT’s Hung stokes fears over WHO lean to China

PARTY”S ONLY CARD:Hung said the reference to UN Resolution 2758 in the WHO’s invitation to Taiwan for the annual WHA is a warning from Beijing to the DPP

Taipei Times
Date: May 12, 2016
By: Stacy Hsu / Staff reporter

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) yesterday urged the

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu, right, introduces new KMT Secretary-General Mo Tien-hu during a Central Standing Committee meeting at the party’s headquarters in Taipei yesterday. Photo: Wang Yi-sung, Taipei Times

Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu, right, introduces new KMT Secretary-General Mo Tien-hu during a Central Standing Committee meeting at the party’s headquarters in Taipei yesterday. Photo: Wang Yi-sung, Taipei Times

Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to face the underlying problems posed by the citation of UN Resolution 2758 in Taiwan’s invitation for this year’s World Health Assembly (WHA), which she said could be a precursor to a full-blown campaign by Beijing against Taipei’s participation in international organizations.

“The key to Taiwan’s abundant achievements in the area of foreign affairs during the KMT’s tenure of the past eight years is stable cross-strait ties, which have been sustained by the [so-called] ‘1992 consensus’ and the mutual good will that accompanies the ‘consensus,’” Hung said at a meeting of the KMT’s Central Standing Committee yesterday afternoon.

Expressing concerns that the achievements could be nullified by the DPP’s opposition to the “1992 consensus,” Hung said that the party’s stance could also put an end to the unofficial diplomatic truce between Taipei and Beijing and make it all the more difficult for Taiwan to participate in international organizations.

The “1992 consensus” — a term former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) admitted making up in 2000 — refers to a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese government that both sides acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.     [FULL  STORY]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept the Privacy Policy

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.