92 formula

九二共識 / 九二共识 / 1992 Consensus[1]

China and Taiwan , or the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, said to have been established in 1992[2] , the principle of cross-strait relations between the Communist Party of China and the Nationalist Party of China . Interpretation and evaluation of cross-strait relations today is such an important subject that it is not an exaggeration to say that it is classified according to whether the 1992 formula is in favor or against it.

Lee Teng -hui , who took office as the successor President of the Republic of China immediately after the death of Chiang Kai -shek's son Chiang Ching -kuo in 1988 , began to take steps to institutionalize Taiwan's previously oppressed political democratization and improve relations with the mainland. To this end, in 1990, the Continental Committee (equivalent to Korea's Ministry of Unification), which was directly responsible for cross-Strait relations, was established under the Executive Yuan , and at the end of April 1991, the Temporary Provisional Committee for Mobilization and Deduction was abolished, tacitly or In effect, it recognized the Chinese Communist Party's rule over the mainland. It was the moment when the Republic of China government's 'mainland recovery' policy, which had lasted for over 40 years, officially ended, following the country's defeat in the Chinese Civil War in 1949 .

Taking this as an opportunity, mainland China and Taiwan began promoting cross-strait exchanges and dialogue, albeit unofficially. The Cross-Strait Relations Association (海峽兩岸關係協會; collectively known as the Sea Association) discussed the principles of cross-strait relations.[3] As a result, on November 16, the China Sea Association delivered the following proposal to the Taiwan Sea Association.

In response to the China Sea Association's proposal, the Taiwan Sea Association said, "(It is difficult for the two sides to agree on the content right away) Each person expresses their position on 'One China' verbally, and the two sides can agree. Let's agree on things." And the China Sea Association accepted it.


(The first cross-strait meeting of the Haekai and Haegi Conference held in Singapore in 1993, the year following the official agreement of 1992)

In this way , the principle of cross-Strait relations was born, " maintain the principle of one China (one China, one country, but express it according to the convenience of each party on both sides of the Straits)", or in short, one-China-two-strait policy. Accordingly, in April 1993, the following year, the first cross-strait talks could be held in Singapore between Wang Daohan of the China Maritime Association and Gu Zhenfu, chairman of the Taiwan Maritime Association.[4] Twenty-two years later, at the first ever cross-strait summit between Taiwanese President Ma Ying- jeou and Chinese President Xi Jinping held in November 2015, both sides confirmed that the 92 Formula is the foundation of cross-strait relations.

The name “92 Official” comes from the fact that it was made in 1992. Originally, it was known by the term ‘ Ichimchukakpyo (一中各表) Formula’, which is a shortened version of the above 8 characters, but in 2000, ahead of the election of Chen Shui-bian, a member of the Democratic Progressive Party , Su Qi, then head of the Continental Committee, named it the 92 formula. It is used to this day.[5]

(Comparison of the claims of both Taiwan and China regarding the interpretation of the 1992 formula)

Outwardly, it is a common perception (共同認識), that is, 'agreement', but in terms of interpretation, it is the Chinese and Taiwanese governments, and furthermore, the two major forces in Taiwan's internal politics, the Flood League centered on the Chinese Nationalist Party and the Democratic Progressive Party . There are completely different claims among the federations .

This was just a search for a compromise to find the least common denominator for exchange and cooperation between the two sides of the 1992 formula. It is a reflection of the limitations that it was not.

It claims that Taiwan has fully agreed to the principle of 'one China', and argues on the basis that Taiwan should follow the one country, two systems unification method of being incorporated into mainland China like Hong Kong and Macau .

Additionally, the continent does not officially recognize the intraday table. The continent, which has overwhelming national power, implicitly wants to intentionally misinterpret that "Taiwan itself has acknowledged that it belongs to one China = the People's Republic of China," so it does not add the extra thing of a one-China vote that neutralizes this.

It emphasizes that ‘each person follows their own expression (regarding one China).’ In other words, the position is that one China does not mean the People's Republic of China on the mainland.[6] It does not give the communist regime a justification for military provocations or invasions, and only adds the unification principle of 'one China' for stable exchange and dialogue, but it means that there is no intention to unilaterally follow the demands of the Chinese Communist Party.

Unlike the mainland, it advocates the daily vote. It is claiming that "the mainland side agreed to use the national name of the Republic of China through the 92 official".

The Beomnok Alliance also criticizes the Kuomintang for being a traitorous group that unilaterally follows the demands of the Chinese Communist Party.

In March 2020, with the election of Zhang Qiqian, a young moderate politician, as the new chairman of the Kuomintang, the call to scrap the 1992 Consensus is gaining ground even within the Kuomintang.

President Zhou Lirun , who visited the US in June 2022, dissed the official itself, saying that the 92 formula is an agreement without an agreement.

They are completely denying and rejecting the 92 formula itself. The logic is that the communist regime in mainland China and the Kuomintang regime, which took control of Taiwan at the time, made a declaration that did not reflect the will of the Taiwanese people. Above all, the Pangrok Alliance, including the Democratic Progressive Party, which calls for separation and independence from China, recognizes the acceptance of the 92 formula, which presupposes cross-strait unification, as going against their political identity.

Already in 1991, the Democratic Progressive Party officially adopted the 'Taiwan Independence Platform' (Taiwan 黨綱), which is "to build an independent and sovereign Taiwan Republic with sovereignty" (建立主權獨立自主的太灣共和國) in the party platform. valid up to Among the moderate dialogue faction within the Democratic Progressive Party, there are claims that the party platform that stipulates Taiwan independence should be deleted or suspended, but the mainstream within the Democratic Progressive Party is still taking a negative attitude.

Tsai Ing-wen , the 14th President of the Republic of China, the Democratic Progressive Party President, presented the 'Taiwan Consensus' to replace the 92 Formula when running for the first presidential election in 2012. However, at the time, President Ma Ying-jeou's policy to improve cross-strait relations was generally well-received, so it did not receive much response and was defeated.

As if reflecting this, in the 2016 presidential election , Tsai Ing-wen emphasized only 'maintaining the status quo' and emphasized the image of distancing herself from the radical separation and independence of the Chen Shui-bian era. The three principles of cross-Strait relations of “communication with China, refraining from provocations, and policy transparency” announced at the end of December, at the end of the presidential election, are also an extension of this.

However, the Chinese Communist regime and the Nationalist Party's request to clarify their position on whether or not to officially accept the 92nd still shows an ambiguous attitude. Even in the first TV debate, he replied, "The 92 formula may be one of several options in cross-strait relations, but it should not be the only option" (九二共識是選項，但不是一的選項).

And in the Presidential Inaugural Address on May 20, 2016, "In 1992, there were several contacts and talks between institutions on both sides of the Strait, and in the process, there were efforts and achievements to seek commonalities while acknowledging each other's differences." "We will respect these 'historical facts'" (1992) . In other words, the meaning of the 1992 official was defined as 'meeting' rather than 'agreement' between the two sides.

In an interview with the Washington Post on July 21, in response to the question, 'Is it true that China has set a deadline for China to decide its position on the '92 Formula?', he responded, "Taiwan is already a very democratic place, and the flow of public opinion is changing. "Because it is so important, 'setting a deadline' and demanding that the Taiwanese government accept each other's conditions despite public opinion is not likely to succeed," he replied. This was an opposition to the ‘time-limited condition’, not a direct denial of the ‘92 formula’. Related Content China's criticism of downgrading Formula 92 from a political and diplomatic 'agreement' with China to a 'discussion' that existed in the past while denying it outright can be said to be an extension of its attempt to maintain ambiguity to avoid.

Since the end of 2018, the 92 Formula has been defined as China's one-sided logic, and its position of rejection has become more clear, saying, "The 92 Formula is a denial of the sovereignty of the Republic of China." Even in the new year of 2019, President Tsai Ing-wen said, "Taiwan absolutely opposes the 'one country, two systems' unification plan demanded by China, and this is a common perception among all Taiwanese people," and used the term 'Taiwan official' again a long time after the 2012 presidential election. did.

Lee Teng-hui was the President of the Republic of China at the time the 92nd Official was drawn, but after he retired, he repeatedly argued that the 92nd Official itself did not exist and was fabricated, emphasizing the blatant Taiwan independence line, causing controversy.


In response, President Ma Ying- jeou launched a rebuttal by releasing a document signed by then-President Lee Teng-hui regarding the government's interpretation of the 92 Formula.[7] However, despite this, Lee Teng-hui did not back down from denying the 92 formula even until his death.

A public opinion poll conducted by the pro-independence Jayu Times in 2019 revealed that 55.7% of all respondents answered that they believed there was no '92 formula'. #