Ma Ying-jeou urges island’s next leader to respond ‘pragmatically’ to Xi’s diplomatic gesture

Former Taiwanese leader Ma Ying-jeou urged Taiwan’s leader-elect to pragmatically respond to the diplomatic gesture made by President Xi Jinping and to recognize the one-China principle, South China Morning Post reported yesterday.

During a meeting in Beijing, last week, Ma highlighted the need for the forthcoming Taiwanese leader, William Lai Ching-te, to appreciate Xi’s approach and avoid advocating for independence. Lai, a member of the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party, secured the top job in January and is set to assume office soon.

“The people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are all Chinese. There is no dispute that cannot be resolved, there is no problem that cannot be discussed, and no force can separate us,” Xi told Ma at the meeting held last Wednesday. 

In a social media statement yesterday, Ma advocated for adherence to the “Republic of China’s Constitution,” which endorses the one-China policy, emphasizing that both sides of the Taiwan Strait are not distinct nations. This constitution was instituted in 1947 by the Kuomintang following their relocation to Taiwan after their defeat in the Chinese civil war by the Communist forces.

Tsai Ing-wen, the current leader from the DPP, has consistently rejected the one-China policies throughout her tenure, which began in 2016. She maintains that Taiwan is sovereign. Her term will conclude on May 20, and her successor, Lai, has already faced criticism from Beijing, labeling him as a provocateur and staunch separatist.

Beijing views Taiwan as a part of its territory, potentially reclaiming it even through force. While most international actors, including the United States, do not formally recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state, they oppose any forceful annexation.

Ma’s post yesterday further implored Lai to commit to not pursuing Taiwanese independence and to re-engage with Beijing under the 1992 consensus, which ambiguously acknowledges one China but allows for differing interpretations by each side. This framework aims to “facilitate dignified and equitable exchanges between the two entities.”