Zheng Weibin
In May 2020, it is a month with special historical value for the three places on both sides of the strait.Tsai Ing -wen was re -elected with high votes and did not mention the 1992 consensus in his inauguration.This is largely announced that the consensus of 1992 was ended in Taiwan.Similarly, on the mainland, the Premier Li Keqiang of the State Council did not mention the 1992 consensus in the government work report.This is an extremely special exception. In the past, similar situations have occurred only when cross -strait relations were tense in 2006 and 2008.
For Hong Kong, during the two sessions of China, the National People's Congress will formulate the National Security Law of the Hong Kong version through resolutions. At least from some Hong Kong people, it means that the failure of one country, two systems in Hong Kong.Although Beijing officials still claim that one country, two systems will continue to be implemented in Hong Kong, the emergence of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law and may be officially introduced in August, which will inevitably weaken Hong Kong people's confidence in one country and two systems and their confidence in Hong Kong's future.
The 1992 consensus and one country and two systems were the political heritage of the 1980s and 1990s. The political space created by the three places on both sides of the strait found coexistence under different institutional frameworks.But today, the 1992 consensus gradually disappeared in the language of cross -strait politicians. The disputes between the one country and the two systems in Hong Kong intensified, and it seems that it is difficult to become a gap between the mainland and Hong Kong.The end or death of these two historical heritages at a certain state today is undoubtedly the breakdown of consensus formed by the consensus formed by the three places on both sides of the 1990s.Where will history start again?
The 1990s was a very special age.After the political storm and economic silence, the mainland re -started the engine after Deng Xiaoping's southern tour in 1992.Economic development was the theme of the mainland that era.In Taiwan on the other side, Jiang Jingguo started the era of democratization in Taiwan in 1987, and carried out real political party politics.New Era.
Taiwan is obviously faster than the mainland.At that time, Taiwanese society had achieved a large degree of prosperity, and the public was concerned about political rights and freedom.Although the Kuomintang regime has been moved into Taiwan since its move to Taiwan, the economic development began with land reform has won a long time of political legitimacy, but it still cannot change the demands of the people's political rights after economic prosperity.Jiang Jingguo is convinced that there is no eternal ruling party. In order to preserve the possibility of the Kuomintang's governance in the future, it has opened up the era of democratization in Taiwan.
In a sense, this economic development will inevitably bring the theory of political reform, which has been verified in Taiwan; therefore, it has also become the foundation for the United States to formulate a policy of contact with China.Although the political reform of the mainland was launched for a time, it finally turned off, but the American politics still believed that the time to give China's economic development, and political changes would still be possible.
But this wish is obviously shattered now.Since Trump took office, the political direction of Washington has quietly changed.Trump's last take of office is not the fundamental factor, and it can only be said to be a catalyst.The United States' attitude towards China has gradually unified from the differences in the past, and the challenges brought about by China's economic prosperity have become a new foundation for its policy to China.
The changes in the United States' policy on China also occurred in the awareness of the Hong Kong, one country, two systems.After long -term negotiations between China and Britain, in 1984, in 1984, it laid the tone to return to China after 1997 to return to China after 1997.In China -British negotiations, Hong Kong people were almost unable to speak, just a silent pawn.
However, because Deng Xiaoping's guarantee of the 50 -year -old system and two systems, and the Hong Kong Policy Law drafted in the United States in 1992, he established confidence in the return of Hong Kong.The goal of Hong Kong policy and law is simple, that is, it is guaranteed that Hong Kong still has sufficient autonomy after returning to China.To this end, the U.S. Congress authorized Washington to treat Hong Kong as an entity separated from mainland China in several policy areas.This provides another endorsement for Hong Kong to continue to maintain prosperity after the return of 1997 and continue to be a world -class financial center.
However, the emergence of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law may end the implementation of one country and two systems in Hong Kong; at least for some Hong Kong people and American politicians.US Secretary of State Pompeo believes that Hong Kong is now a country and one system.On May 27, Pompeo proved to Congress that Hong Kong was no longer qualified to obtain differential treatment; on May 29, Trump announced that he would revoke Hong Kong's unique position in accordance with US law.
Regarding the emergence of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law, the mainland believes that the anti -repair campaign that Hong Kong's outbreak since last year has threatened national security, so it has to be legislated.This is also the result of Hong Kong's rejection of Article 23 of the Basic Law.However, from the perspective of Hong Kong people, at least some people cannot complete the legislation of Article 23 of the Basic Law, because the one country, two systems have not been well -implemented.After many efforts of the Legislative Council and the Chief Executive of the SAR, it is still unable to achieve direct selection goals, that is, it is considered an intuitive result.
Who is the result and who is the reason for the current reality is not important, and history will eventually answer.However, the current reality is that the political pressure of the mainland has been formed over Hong Kong.When the Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Office of the State Council and the Director of the China United Nations Office, when the officials who retired from the mainland to the second line, they took office, which means the fundamental change of Beijing's thinking of governing the port.
The mainland has tried to achieve the greatest consensus under the different political systems and social values of the three places on both sides of the strait to achieve the unity of the country.Because this difference can ultimately achieve peaceful docking when the economic level develops to equivalent.
But now it seems that when the per capita living standards of the mainland have not reached the level of the people of Taiwan and Hong Kong, they have a huge difference in influence between the three due to the huge volume of the mainland.At the same time, it is even more fundamentally hidden in different ideology under the political system. Against the background of the people's perception of political rights inconsistent, the three places on both sides of the strait will eventually cannot form a closer consensus on the unified cognition of the country.
In the 1990s, the three places on both sides of the strait were embrace their hope for their new future and opened their own path.And leave some vague space between each other to make each other better, and hope that in the future development process, we can hope that one day to create more coexistence; but now everything seems to end.In the past, the blurred consensus had broken, but can history be re -granted?
The author is Beijing Freelance
When the per capita living standards of the mainland have not reached the level of Taiwan and Hong Kong, they have a huge difference in influence between the three due to the huge volume of the mainland.At the same time, it is even more fundamentally hidden in different ideology under the political system. Against the background of the people's perception of political rights inconsistent, the three places on both sides of the strait will eventually cannot form a closer consensus on the unified cognition of the country.
