2024年11月18日，國台辦主任宋濤在廈門會見台灣前立法院院長、國民黨元老王金平。王先生前往大陸祭拜祖先，參與兩岸社會交流。
王金平訪問廈門之際，正值南京大學台灣研究所於11月17日在南京舉辦兩岸關係學術研討會。有趣的是，有學者談到「中華民族共同體意識與兩岸命運共同體的建設」。看來，宋濤所說的共同中華文化，與本次南京會議的重點之一，即建構「中華民族共同體意識」、「兩岸共同體」有相似之處。
11月24日，就在宋王會面8天後，澳門地區中國和平統一促進會在澳門舉行慶祝成立20周年晚宴。根據澳門媒體的報道，主要發言者圍繞着反對台獨、鼓勵促進和擴大兩岸社會交往兩大主題 。
由此可見，近來兩岸社會互動的發展呈現出新的趨勢，台灣的國民黨元老一直扮演着重要的中介角色，而大陸方面則不僅僅以中華文化復興的概念作為訴求。
澳門可成為兩岸特殊溝通平台
此外，在澳門地區中國和平統一促進會主辦的晚宴中，最有趣的環節是中聯辦台灣事務部部長李永剛的致辭，他表示一國兩制有其最大的生命力和優勢。該協會會長劉藝良亦補充，可以進一步探索一國兩制的台灣模式，澳門可以成為雙方探討解決台灣未來方案的「特殊溝通平台」。
劉的言論具有政治意義。首先，他關於探索一國兩制台灣模式的言論，符合大陸當局向台灣發出的某些呼籲，包括中國大陸政府2022年8月發表的《台灣問題白皮書》。劉提到「溝通平台」，似乎暗示澳門很可能成為兩岸代表會面、並討論解決台灣未來方案的重要場所。
台灣地區領導人賴清德正出發訪問美國屬地關島和夏威夷，隨後他將訪問馬紹爾群島、吐瓦魯及帛琉。中國對此表示不滿，並向美國政府發出警告，反對美國支持台灣「分離主義」。台灣方面預計，大陸可能會舉行更多軍事演習，以回應賴清德的挑釁性訪問。
儘管存在口水戰和炫耀軍事實力，但最近兩岸的文化互動，特別是加強文化活動和文化認同的訴求具有重要的政治意涵。
統一進程第一階段或為文化互動
首先，如果中國2022年8月的《台灣問題白皮書》談到考慮分階段實現統一進程，那麼第一階段很可能是文化互動，以增強文化認同和交流。從某種意義上說，這個文化舞台似乎正在低調、無聲地啟動。
其次，除非台方完全拒絕一國兩制的台灣模式，否則這種模式可以進一步探索。然而，王金平似乎並不熱衷於這種模式，這意味着大陸決策者可能在未來幾年，必須為台灣考慮更靈活和可行的模式。
第三，王金平、馬英九等國民黨元老一直在台海兩岸扮演中間人的角色。作為兩國之間的關鍵中介人，他們的角色注定會愈來愈大。
第四，賴清德過境美國領土的「挑釁」之旅中，雙方文化互動不間斷，這意味着中國大陸方面更重視務實而非軍事對抗。這次40人的代表團訪台具有政治意義，因為文化和體育交流的政治敏感度要低得多，而且政治務實得多。
國共兩黨正討論復辦雙城論壇
第五，大陸與國民黨雙方正在討論恢復上海與台北兩市雙城論壇的可能性。台北市長蔣萬安仍希望2024年舉辦台北上海論壇。鑑於大陸方面已與部分台灣民眾組織了多次文化交流活動，論壇很可能在台北舉行，從而緩解兩岸緊張局勢，為兩岸關係走向更加溫暖的方向。
第六，在王金平訪問廈門之際，正值兩岸關係南京會議召開之時，台灣有報道稱，兩岸正在低調召開會議，尋求和平解決問題。 當時有五位大陸學者前往台灣參加會議。如果報導屬實，兩岸學者已展現對尋求台灣未來務實解決方案的渴望。
總而言之，近來大陸、台灣乃至澳門的大陸人和台灣人之間的文化和社會互動日益加強，值得我們關注和深入分析。儘管官方和言論層面存在口水戰，但政治和社會實用主義戰勝了意識形態分歧。
因此，我們看到國民黨元老在兩岸之間積極調解的作用不斷增強。同樣，尋求解決台灣未來問題的學術會議已在南京和台北舉行，而澳門則被稱為兩岸對話的「特殊溝通平台」。如果事情推進順利，下一階段將是討論如何落實一國兩制的台灣模式，以及台灣人民是否會更喜歡另一種政治靈活性更大、同時保留其鮮明和獨特文化身份的模式。
New developments in Cross-Strait social interactions
Recent developments in cross-strait social interactions have pointed to a new trend in which while the Kuomintang (KMT) elders in Taiwan have been playing a crucial role as intermediaries, the mainland side has not only utilized the concept of Chinese cultural renaissance as an appeal for cross-strait unity and consensus, but also reignited some mainlanders’ visit to Taiwan as a gesture of goodwill.
On November 18, 2024, Song Tao, the director of the Chinese State Council’s Taiwan Affairs Office, met Wang Jin-pyng, the former leader of Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan and an elder statesman of the KMT, in the city of Xiamen. Wang went to the mainland to pay respect to his ancestors and participate in cross-strait social exchanges.
According to Xinhua news, during the meeting, Song, who was also the head of the Taiwan Work Office of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, pledged to uphold the one-China principle, to oppose the separatist tendencies in Taiwan, to vow advancing the process of national reunification, and to achieve Chinese national rejuvenation.
This was nothing new from Song’s remarks, from an analytical perspective. Yet, what was interesting in Song’s comments was that he urged more efforts from both sides to promote cross-strait cultural exchanges, to jointly propel the development of the Chinese culture, to enhance national Chinese identity and Chinese cultural identity among the compatriots, and to maintain peace across the two sides.
Obviously, Song used the commonality of Chinese culture and Chinese cultural identity to appeal for more cross-strait social interactions.
In response to Song’s remarks, Wang said that the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait have common blood and ancestry connecting them, especially with the same cultural root, and same origin of religions and families. As such, Wang added that maintaining peace and stability is the common aspiration of the people from two sides of the Taiwan Strait so that they will strive for more cultural interactions, more cultural promotion activities, and much stronger cultural and national identity for the sake of “creating a new scenario for two sides of the strait” (Jornal San Wa Ou, November 19, 2024).
Diplomatically speaking, Wang wisely echoed the remarks of Song and concurred with the need to enhance social interactions with a view to enhancing the bonds of common national identity and cultural identity.
Wang Jin-pyng’s visit to Xiamen coincided with a cross-strait academic conference hosted by Nanjing University in Nanjing on November 17. The conference reportedly attract 120 academics and experts from the mainland and Taiwan to discuss cross-strait relations (see: 南京大學舉辦兩岸關係學術研討會 (hkcna.hk), November 17, 2024). What was interesting was that some academics talked about “the construction of cross-strait common entity and common consciousness of the Chinese nation.” It seems that what Song Tao talked about common cultural identity and common Chinese culture bear resemblance with one of the key emphases of this Nanjing conference, namely the construction of cross-strait “common entity” and “common consciousness of the Chinese nation.”
On November 24, just eight days after the meeting between Song and Wang, the Association in Promotion of Peaceful Reunification of China in the Macau Region held a dinner celebrating its 20th anniversary in Macau. Judging from the news report in Macau, the main speakers harped on the two themes of opposing Taiwan separatism and encouraging the promotion and expansion of social exchanges between the mainland and Taiwan sides (see Macau Daily News, November 25, 2024, p. A03).
However, the most interesting part of the dinner hosted by the Association in Promotion of Peaceful Reunification of China in the Macau Region was a speech delivered by Li Yongjiang, an official of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the Macau Liaison Office, who said that the “one country, two systems” has its greatest vitality and advantages. His remarks were supplemented by the Association’s chairman Lao Ngai Leong, who commented that a Taiwan model of the “one country, two systems” can be explored further, and that Macau can be “a special communicative platform” through which both sides can explore solutions to solve the question of Taiwan’s future (Macau Daily News, November 25, 2024, p. A03).
Analytically speaking, Lao’s comments were politically significant. First, his comment on exploring the Taiwan model of “one country, two systems” was in line with the appeal of some mainland authorities to the Taiwan side, including the White Paper on the Taiwan Question issued by the mainland Chinese government in August 2022. Second, his description of Macau as a “special communicative platform” appeared to imply that Macau will likely be an important place for both sides of the intermediaries or representatives to meet and discuss a solution to tackle Taiwan’s political future in the coming years.
All these interesting cross-strait activities came to an apex on November 27, when a batch of 40 mainland teachers and students from the Peking University, Tsinghua University and Sun Yat Sen University went to Taiwan for a 9-day visit at the invitation of the former KMT leader, Ma Ying-jeou.
On November 29, the six-time Olympic table tennis champion Ma Long, who is a postgraduate research student at the Beijing Sports University, visited the Chinese Culture University in Taipei as part of the 40-member delegation visit and efforts to promote exchanges with the Taiwanese athletes. During the Taiwan tour, Ma Long engaged in a friendly match with Taiwan’s female paddler Chen Szu-yu and veteran player Chiang Peng-lung (see: Chinese Olympic champion visits Taipei university for table tennis exchange – Focus Taiwan, November 29, 2024).
The mainland Chinese delegation also visited the National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University’s Yangming campus in Taipei for a musical exchange in which two students from Tsinghua University and Fujian Normal University performed the violin and Hulusi, also known as gourd flute, in front of a Taiwanese audience.
All these cultural exchange activities came at a time before William Lai, the Taiwan leader, is going to stop over in the US territories of Guam and Hawaii before he will visit the Marshal Island, Palau, and Tuvalu. China has showed unhappiness and issued a warning to the US government against any American support of Taiwan’s “separatism.”
The Taiwan side has expected more military drills would likely be conducted by China in response to the provocative visit by William Lai.
Despite the war of words in rhetoric and the flexing of Chinese military muscles, the recent cultural interactions between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, especially the appeal to enhancing cultural activities and cultural identity have important political implications.
First and foremost, if the Chinese White Paper on Taiwan’s question in August 2022 talked about the idea of considering a stage-by-stage process of reunification, then the first stage is very likely embracing cultural interactions so as to enhance the cultural identity, cultural recognition, and cultural bonds of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. In a sense, this cultural stage seems to kickstart in a low-key and silent manner.
Second, the Taiwan model of “one country, two systems” can and will be explored further, unless the Taiwan side totally rejects such a model. Wang Jin-pyng did not appear to be warm to such a model in his mainland trip, however, implying that the mainland policy-makers may have to ponder an even more flexible and workable model for Taiwan in the coming years.
Third, the KMT elders like Wang Jin-pyng and Ma Ying-jeou have been playing the role of middlemen between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Their role is destined to be increasingly influential as the key intermediaries between the two sides.
Fourth, the cultural interactions between the two sides are non-stop amid the “provocative” trip of William Lai who stops over in American territories – meaning that the mainland Chinese side attaches more importance to pragmatism than to military confrontation. The 40-member delegation’s visit to Taiwan is politically significant as cultural and sports exchange is far less politically sensitive and far more politically pragmatic.
Fifth, both the mainland and KMT sides are discussing the possibility of resuming the “dual cities forum” between the cities of Shanghai and Taipei. Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-on still hopes that the Taipei-Shanghai Forum in 2024 will be held. Given the fact that the mainland side has organized a number of cultural exchange activities with some Taiwan people, it is likely that the Forum will be held in Taipei, thereby reducing cross-strait tensions, and pointing to a warmer direction between the two sides in the short run.
A stage-by-stage process of negotiations between the mainland and Taiwan has already begun silently with the recent and ongoing cultural exchanges. If so, the recent mainland emphasis on the expansion of a common Chinese cultural identity and national rejuvenation will be an inevitable trend in the ongoing cross-strait discussions in search of a solution for Taiwan in the coming years.
Sixth, at a time when Wang Jin-pyng visited Xiamen, and at a juncture when the Nanjing conference on cross-strait relations was held, it was reported in Taiwan that a low-key cross-strait conference in search for a peaceful resolution on the future of Taiwan was also held simultaneously at the National Chengchi University also in November, when five mainland academics went to attend the conference in Taiwan (Liberty Times, November 27, 2024). If this report was accurate, both sides have demonstrated the willingness and eagerness of some academics across the two straits to search for pragmatic solutions on Taiwan’s political future.
In conclusion, the recently enhanced cultural and social interactions between the mainlanders and the Taiwan people in the mainland, Taiwan and even Macau deserve our attention and closer analyses. It appears that despite the war of words at the official and rhetorical levels, political and social pragmatism prevails over ideological differences.
As such, we have seen the enhanced role of the KMT elders in being an active intermediary between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Similarly, academic conferences in search of a solution to tackle the future of Taiwan were already held in both Nanjing and Taipei, while Macau was mentioned as a “special communicative platform” for both the mainland and Taiwan to engage in discussion, dialogue, and viable solutions. If so, the next stage will be on how the Taiwan model of “one country, two systems” should be concretized and whether the people of Taiwan may prefer another model with more political flexibility while retaining the very distinct and unique Taiwan’s cultural identity.
A stage-by-stage process of negotiations between the mainland and Taiwan has already begun silently with the recent and ongoing cultural exchanges. If so, the recent mainland emphasis on the expansion of a common Chinese cultural identity and national rejuvenation will be an inevitable trend in the ongoing cross-strait discussions in search of a solution for Taiwan in the coming years.
原刊於澳門新聞通訊社（MNA）網站，本社獲作者授權轉載。（原文按此）
