台灣大地文教基金會一直致力於國民外交的工作，自2003年起更增加Taiwan Impression的英文報重點摘取，期望大家對於台灣的大小事，都能以英文向國際社會發聲。
自2008年6月中旬起，更新增英文報的發音閱讀，希望大家多聽並多開口說英文，時時把握國民外交的機會。
歡迎您收聽、閱讀最新一期的Taiwan Impression(July) ~
1992 ‘Nonsensus’
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is right when she asks why the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wants to resume cross-strait negotiations based on the so-called “1992 consensus” without clarifying what the consensus is (“Tsai rejects independence criticism,” June 4, page 3).
As a matter of fact, the whole notion of the “1992 consensus” should immediately be thrown on the ash heap of history. Not just because its meaning and content are unclear, but because the concept dates from 1992 — well before Taiwan became a democracy.
In 1992, Taiwan was still a one-party state. It was four years before its first direct presidential election took place, eight years before the first peaceful transfer of power in the nation’s history and only six years after the DPP was born. The so-called “consensus” therefore could not have had the backing of the people.
The moment Taiwan became a democracy, all previously concluded agreements had to be swept off the table.
The “1992 nonsensus” would be a more appropriate name for this so-called “agreement.”
COEN BLAAUW
Washington
(感謝Leo發音的友情贊助)
錄音檔語法(歡迎轉貼，請註明出處)
延伸閱讀：
Taiwan Impression
大地點播站
自2008年6月中旬起，更新增英文報的發音閱讀，希望大家多聽並多開口說英文，時時把握國民外交的機會。
歡迎您收聽、閱讀最新一期的Taiwan Impression(July) ~
1992 ‘Nonsensus’
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is right when she asks why the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wants to resume cross-strait negotiations based on the so-called “1992 consensus” without clarifying what the consensus is (“Tsai rejects independence criticism,” June 4, page 3).
As a matter of fact, the whole notion of the “1992 consensus” should immediately be thrown on the ash heap of history. Not just because its meaning and content are unclear, but because the concept dates from 1992 — well before Taiwan became a democracy.
In 1992, Taiwan was still a one-party state. It was four years before its first direct presidential election took place, eight years before the first peaceful transfer of power in the nation’s history and only six years after the DPP was born. The so-called “consensus” therefore could not have had the backing of the people.
The moment Taiwan became a democracy, all previously concluded agreements had to be swept off the table.
The “1992 nonsensus” would be a more appropriate name for this so-called “agreement.”
COEN BLAAUW
Washington
(感謝Leo發音的友情贊助)
錄音檔語法(歡迎轉貼，請註明出處)
延伸閱讀：
Taiwan Impression
大地點播站
沒有留言:
張貼留言