Hold the Ma Xi Meeting in a Third Locale?

Hold the Ma Xi Meeting in a Third Locale?
United Daily News editorial
(Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
March 7, 2014

Summary: As we can see from Sun Yafu's remarks, Beijing knows it must not pass up this chance for a Ma Xi meeting. The APEC conference in Beijing is still the preferred venue for a Ma Xi meeting. If it is held in a third venue, Honolulu and Geneva are equally good. But most importantly, it must underscore that neither side gobbles up the other.

Full text below:

Sun Yafu is vice president of ARATS. During an interview with a reporter from this newspaper, Sun said many venues are suitable for a Ma Xi meeting. He said a third locale could be considered. He said, "If we make detailed plans for a meeting of leaders from the two sides, the possibilities are endless."

In response, an unnamed senior MAC official responded. He said the Taipei side still believes the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) conference remins the most appropriate venue for a Ma Xi meeting. He said that for time being the Taipei side had no other view on the matter.

Sun Yafu's statement suggests the following. One. Beijing has ruled out a Ma Xi meeting at APEC this fall. This is increasingly apparent. Two. Beijing is more willing to arrange a Ma Xi meeting than before. This too is increasingly apparent. Three. Beijing is not being stubborn when it refuses to hold the meeting at APEC. Beijing is willing to hold it at a third locale. Four. Sun Yafu's language shows that if Ma and Xi meet, they will be able to address each other as "the leader of the Taiwan side" and "the leader of the Mainland side." Five. Sun is emphasizing the content of a Ma Xi meeting.

We think the Beijing APEC conference is the most suitable venue for a Ma Xi meeting. Consider Taipei's perspective. Suppose Ma Ying-jeou as "the leader of the Taiwan side" is able to meet with "the leader of the Mainland side," in the Great Hall of the People? Suppose he is also able to meet with other economic leaders at APEC? This would be interpreted as a further expression of the "one China framework." Consider Beijing's perspective. Suppose Ma Ying-jeou visits the Great Hall of the People and meets with Xi Jinping? This would underscore the connection between the two sides within the "one China framework." On the other hand, suppose Ma Ying-jeou is photographed shuttling back and forth between various heads of state? This is something that Beijing may have difficulty accepting, internationally and domestically.

Sun Yafu's remarks are revealing. Beijing has reiterated that the "cross-strait leaders meeting need not be held in an international venue." Beijing probably means that an international conference such as APEC need not be the venue for a Ma Xi meeting. Beijing however is amenable to holding the meeting in a third locale, i.e., a foreign locale. As Beijing sees it, that would be a "foreign venue" but not an "international venue."

Zhongnanhai has yet to exercise "greater imagination ." Beijing considers a Ma Xi meeting at APEC problematic. Ma Ying-jeou would not merely arrive in Beijing. He would also attend APEC. He would not merely attend APEC. He would also meet Xi Jinping alone in the Great Hall of the People. A Ma Xi meeting held in Beijing's "home court" would be the Mainland's first choice. But Beijing wants the Ma Xi meeting delinked from the APEC conference. That is why it has suggested a "third locale." Beijing is willing to forsake its "home court advantage" and to ask the Ma government to choose a "third locale." The ball is now back in the Ma's court.

As previously noted, a Ma Xi meeting held in Beijing at the APEC conference is the Ma government's first choice. This is due to public sentiment on Taiwan. A Ma Xi meeting at the APEC conference in Beijing would receive greater public support. If the meeting were moved to a "third locale" it would be obvious that it was Ma's second choice. it would be obvious that it was the resulf of his failure to get his first choice, APEC. This would be sure to generate controversy. But consider another perspective. Holding the meeting at a "third locale" would avoid Beijing's "home court advantage." Ma and Xi would still be able to address each other as "the leader of the Taiwan side" and "the leader of the Mainland side." They would still meet as peers and equals, even more than they would have had they met in Beijing. A "third locale" would not be an "international conference" and an "international venue." But no one could deny it was "international" in character. Therefore a Ma Xi meeting held in Beijing at the APEC conference, as opposed to one held at a "third locale" each have their pros and cons.

Further contemplation raises two questions. One. Where would this "third locale" be? Two. Sun Yafu asked how the content of the meeting for the leaders of the two sides would be determined. First consider the locale. Allow us to make a suggestion. The third locale could be Honolulu. Reason One: Honolulu is where Sun Yat-sen founded the Xinzhonghui. It is the common origin for both sides. Reason Two: The Hawaiian Islands are offshore islands of the United States. This would underscore how far peaceful cross-strait relations have come. This would show that it is an undertaking of global significance. A second choice for the third locale could be Geneva, Switzerland. Geneva is a symbol of human civilization and peace. Singapore would also do. But it might make it harder for any Ma Xi meeting to outshine the Koo-Wang meeting.

Finally, the key is the content of the Ma Xi meeting. We think the content of the Ma Xi meeting must include certain elements. It must advance toward the "big roof concept of China." It must avoid "You gobbling me up and me gobbling you up." In other words, the Ma Xi meeting must recognize the Republic of China under the big roof concept of China.

Any Ma Xi meeting must be consistent with the above. Otherwise Ma Ying-jeou could participate in a Ma Xi meeting at a third locale, but the results would add up to nothing. A Ma Xi meeting in a third locale must produce these results. Otherwise its impact on cross-strait relations would be negative. Why? Because during any Ma Xi meeting, the ROC public and not just Ma, would be seated across from Xi Jinping.

As we can see from Sun Yafu's remarks, Beijing knows it must not pass up this chance for a Ma Xi meeting. The APEC conference in Beijing is still the preferred venue for a Ma Xi meeting. If it is held in a third venue, Honolulu and Geneva are equally good. But most importantly, it must underscore that neither side gobbles up the other.

論馬習會在第三地舉行
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.03.07 04:23 am

海協會副會長孫亞夫接受本報記者採訪時表示，舉行馬習會的地點想像空間很大，包括可在第三地。他並說：「如果我們對兩岸領導人會面的內容設計得很豐富，這時候想像空間還可以更大。」

對此，陸委會高層在第一時間的不具名回應是：我方認為，亞太經合會（ＡＰＥＣ）仍是馬習會最適當的場合，目前沒有新的說法。

孫亞夫的談話顯示：一、北京排除今秋北京ＡＰＥＣ馬習會的傾向已更趨明顯；二、但北京對促成馬習會的意願亦更趨明顯；三、不在ＡＰＥＣ舉行是北京的固執，可在第三地舉行則是北京的讓步；四、從孫亞夫的用語可知，馬習若會面，互稱「台灣方面領導人」及「大陸方面領導人」的規格似已確定。五、強調馬習會的「內容設計」。

我們也認為，北京ＡＰＥＣ應是馬習會最適當的場合。畢竟，對台北而言，馬英九以「台灣領導人」身分在人民大會堂見「大陸領導人」習近平，又能在ＡＰＥＣ與其他「經濟體領袖」共處一堂，這自是對「一中架構」的進階詮釋；但對北京而言，馬英九赴人民大會堂見習近平固可顯示兩岸「一中框架」的連結，若也見馬英九在各國元首間穿梭合影，則恐是北京在現階段氛圍中對外與對內的難題。

因而，孫亞夫的說法顯示：前此北京屢申「兩岸領導人會面無須藉助國際場合」，至此已經轉化為「無須藉助ＡＰＥＣ的國際會議場合」，但可在第三地，也就是可在「外國」。北京的認知是：那是「外國」，但不是「國際（會議）場合」。

在中南海尚無「更大的想像力」之前，北京所認為的ＡＰＥＣ馬習會的難題是：馬英九不能只到「北京」，卻不到「ＡＰＥＣ」；也不能只到「ＡＰＥＣ」，卻不赴人民大會堂單獨會習近平。因而，馬習會若能在北京的「主場」舉行，雖是大陸方面的第一選擇；但北京既要馬習會與ＡＰＥＣ脫鉤，於是有了「第三地舉行」之議。亦即，北京放棄了「主場」，並要馬政府改選「第三地」。如今，球又打回了馬政府的場中。

如前所論，在北京ＡＰＥＣ舉行馬習會，自是馬政府的首選。因為，以台灣的民意民情論，「北京ＡＰＥＣ馬習會」自能獲得較大的支持；若是轉至「第三地」，又明知是爭取ＡＰＥＣ馬習會失敗後的第二選擇，必定較滋爭議。但是，從另一角度看，在「第三地」舉行，避免了北京的「主場效應」，且馬習又能以「台灣領導人」、「大陸領導人」互稱，卻也比若在北京會面更能呈現「對等／平等」；而「第三地」雖不是「國際會議場合」，但無人可以否認其為「國際」。所以，馬習會在「北京ＡＰＥＣ」或「第三地」之間的選擇，仍可從相對的角度評估其得失利害。

進一步的評估元素有二：一、「第三地」究係何地？二、孫亞夫所說的「兩岸領導人會面的內容設計」究係如何？先說地點。若容我們借箸代籌，第三地可選在檀香山。理由一、檀香山是孫中山創建興中會之地，是兩岸精神的共同淵源；理由二、夏威夷是美國的離島，可彰顯兩岸和平發展的進階工程，為世界共襄之盛舉。第三地的第二選擇，也可在瑞士日內瓦，因為那是人類文明的和平象徵。新加坡亦可，卻會使馬習會在形式上的意義未能超越當年辜汪會。

最後，關鍵則在馬習會的「內容設計」。我們認為，馬習會的「內容設計」必須維持一個主軸要素，那就是：必須朝向「大屋頂中國」的方向思考，絕不能有「你吃掉我／我吃掉你」的意念。也就是說，馬習會上必須確立「在大屋頂架構下／正視中華民國」的政策原則。

倘若馬習會的「內容設計」不作此想，馬英九赴第三地參與馬習會的可能性即趨近於零。如果馬英九在第三地馬習會上不能攜回這類的成果，此會在兩岸關係上恐怕反而會變成負數。因為，在馬習會上，坐在習近平對面的，不只是馬英九，同時也是中華民國的民意。

從孫亞夫的談話可以看出，北京畢竟知道馬習會的機不可失。我們認為，北京ＡＰＥＣ仍是馬習會的首選場合；如果是在第三地，則檀香山、日內瓦均佳；但最重要的是，必須端出「不是誰吃誰」的「內容設計」。