The News Lens international edition is sponsored by Tutor A B C

The Economic Democracy Union and other civic associations organized a demonstration against the Ma-Xi meeting on November 7. Lin Fei-fan, leader of the Sunflower Student Movement, also took part. Lin said on stage that President Ma Ying-jeou can’t represent the people of Taiwan and Taiwan is not a part of China. He also said it is important to let the world know that the Taiwanese are the only ones that can fix this.

Liberty Times reports, Lai Chung-chiang, coordinator of the Economic Democracy Union, read a joint statement pointing out that Ma and Xi both advocate for the “one China principle," but Xi denies the “one China, respective interpretations,” which shatters Ma’s “1992 Consensus."

Lai also says that he can’t accept the “One China" proposed by Ma and Xi. The Taiwanese people have the right of self-determination regarding their country’s future and denying this right is changing the current status quo.

In a joint statement issued by Taiwanese overseas students on November 8, it reads:

“China-Taiwan Meeting” between President Xi Jinping and President Ma Ying-Jeou took place on the 7th November 2015 in Singapore brings leaders across the Taiwan Strait together for the very first time in history. Unfortunately, this historic meeting was conducted with opacity in every aspects.

Taiwanese overseas students around the world express grave concerns about this development. We strongly condemn this meeting and its result. We, as a part of Taiwanese people, are here to call for world’s attention to the distortion of the “status quo” of Taiwan and would like to make the following statement:

I. We Oppose to the Black-box Manipulation and Anti-Democracy Nature of the Meeting

This so called “historic” meeting was conducted in the lack of procedural justice and public consensus. President Ma’s diplomatic gestures, is realising game-changing signals inappropriately in his people’s name without legitamacy. Most Taiwanese people, even our legislature (Legislative Yuan) and media were told merely few hours before the meeting. Such behaviour of our leader is harming Taiwan’s democracy and sovereignty with his individual believing and obstinacy. We as a part of Taiwanese people, strongly oppose this ambush-like meeting to assert any political purpose in the name of Taiwanese people.

II. We Oppose any Political Assertion in the Meeting and the Forged 1992 Consensus

The so called “1992 Consensus” from both leaders does not provide any legitimacy nor legality for this meeting, simply because it was a forged assertion to serve One China Policy and to facilitate the dodge of both parties from Taiwanese people’s true consensus. Shall “1992 Consensus” exsit, why did President Ma and President Xi advance KMT’s previously claiming context from “one China, respective interpretations” to “One China” in the meeting, more precisely, in the visible part of the meeting. We need to express our grave concern that jeopardises Taiwan’s status quo as an independent sovereign nation. We believe it would be reasonable to demand President Ma for further clarification of his “One China” context to his people back home.

III. We Acknowledge No Consensus Reached in the Meeting in Taiwanese People’s Name

Those rhetorical assertions from both leaders in the meeting have reached no consensus among people across Taiwan Strait. Ma and Xi’s expressions of “Cross-Strait Chinese Renaissance”and “Both Sides belonging to One China Ethnicity” are unacceptible, not just because of the forged prerequisite “1992 Consensus”, but also the disrespectful assertion to Taiwan’s culture-diversified citizens. Apperently, Taiwan and China have different imaginations and understandings of nationality. We strongly condemn autocratic rhetoric and the ignorance of independent sovereignty as a fact in this “China-Taiwan Talk”. Neither Chinese citizens nor Taiwanese people were seen in this talk. Furthermore, we, as a part of Taiwanese people, regret China’s posing threats on Taiwan’s security and Asian-Pacific prosperity, especially outnumbered missiles towards Taiwanese people.

IV. We Deny any Claim from Our Caretaker President with Extremely Low Rate of Public Support

No assertion in the meeting raised by both leaders should be considered as representation of Taiwanese people, including accelerating negotiations of “Cross-Strait Goods Trade Agreement”, “Establishment of Offiicial Offices”, “Chinese Tourists Transiting Protocols” and “the Participation of Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank(AIIB)”. All these major decisions regarding Taiwan’s future in the long run should not be made by a very unpopular President back home, in terms of political credibility, public support and time frame. We, as a part of Taiwanese people, call upon President Ma to respect the voters in the last six months of his term of duty, even considering the pursuit of “historical role”, “Nobel Peace Prize” or something else, for Taiwan people’s sake.

We, as a part of Taiwanese people, are now sending our message to the world.

This joint statement is addressed by previous Taiwanese activists of 2014 Sunflower Movement Global, including:

Japan: Study Japan, Broaden Taiwan (Fukuoka, Kobe, Kyoto, Nagoya, Tokyo association), Black Tide in Island Arc, Tokyo Na San Ma GU Study Group,Fukuoka Ga Ma Ran Study Group, Intellectual Taiwanese in Aichi
Canada: Island Operation
US: LA Taiwan Buzz, Philosophy on Friday @ Boston
Australia: Island Nations Alliance (INA)
Germany: 330 Taiwan Freedom & Right in Action (330 twFRA)

Translated by Olivia Yang