[Editor's Note] Communication is Strength

History often repeats itself.

At the thirteenth APEC forum, which aligned itself with the global response against terror, we saw PRC foreign minister Tang Jiaxuan set a dismal example when at a ministerial press conference before the final leaders' summit he berated Taiwanese reporters and treated Taiwan's delegates with great discourtesy. His behavior not only made a mockery of the summit's primary theme of opposition to terrorism, violence and hatred, but also starkly reminded Taiwan's people how far cross-strait relations still have to go.

We are naturally reminded too of how, on the eve of last year's presidential elections, PRC premier Zhu Rongji sought to intimidate Taiwan's electorate, and how on an earlier occasion CPC general secretary Jiang Zemin, when asked by a Taiwanese reporter what the Taiwan experience might offer the mainland, retorted that Taiwan was too insignificant a place to offer China anything.

What's going on here? Probably all ordinary people in Taiwan are mystified when they see such events on their TV screens. But what we should really be asking is, why do PRC leaders' reactions so often seem out of line, or even beyond reason or rationality?

Yet that raises the question, what is reasonable and rational? And from whose perspective? What is the "logic" behind these all-too-familiar outbursts? How do they impact the ROC when they occur on the international stage? And how should we respond in future?

First we should rewind and observe closely whether Tang Jiaxuan's response was an emotional or a strategic one. Was his anger directed at the Taiwanese media's use of words, or was he merely seizing the opportunity to reiterate the sacred inviolability of "China" before an international audience, in order to win approval on the mainland-especially among CPC hard-liners-for his "politically correct" stance? Although for the Chinese Communists the basic principle of "one big China" remains the same in both cases, the two may require different responses from us in our future dealings with Beijing in the international arena.

We should also remind PRC leaders that such eruptions seriously hurt Taiwanese people's feelings and their sense of affinity with China. They only push Taiwan further away, and give the impression that the wielders of power in the PRC are full of anger, exasperation and animosity against Taiwan. Is this really what they hoped their words would achieve?

It is precisely because these hostile statements by PRC officials appear so unreasonable that we need to calmly consider what lies behind them. Is it that the cross-strait rift is too deep? That our lack of understanding of each other's cultures and mentalities is so great that we are unable to put ourselves in each other's shoes? At present each side views things only from its own perspective, unable to take a broader view or seek consensus. This runs counter to the international trend of forming strategic alliances to pursue the common good. It is not only that Tang's words broke with the APEC spirit and harmed prospects for cross-strait conciliation. On the eve of both sides' markets being opened to the world after WTO accession, if we cannot work together and complement each other's strengths, in the long term this is certain to affect our common future competitiveness. This is surely an outcome no-one would welcome.

Although cross-strait economic and cultural exchanges have burgeoned in recent years, the activity schedules of exchange groups on their brief visits are very full, and dialogue remains on an extremely superficial level. Looking back beyond the current 50-year standoff between Taiwan and the mainland, the two have in fact been separated for over a century, and have vastly different experiences. Each side needs to learn to understand and respect the other, and in the process to seek the highest common denominator of coexistence and mutual benefit. This is the only course that offers the greatest mutual advantage to both the 1.2 billion people of the mainland and the 23 million people of Taiwan.

From this month's cover story "West vs. South: Taiwan Investors Do Have a Choice," you will discover that there is little conflict between the options of investing in mainland China or in Southeast Asia. Firms investing abroad have their own overall considerations and priorities, and these pioneers of Taiwan's economic miracle have mostly considered many locations before making their choice. Some turned their sights toward Southeast Asia after experiencing setbacks in mainland China, while others moved in the opposite direction following the Asian financial crisis. There are also many companies with factories in both regions. Economic survival, quality of life and receiving respect as human beings are basic demands of Taiwanese business people, and why should they not also be the shared expectations of people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait?

Another special report well worth reading is "Long-Lost Relatives-Taiwanese Opera on the Mainland." This detailed and wide-ranging feature examines how gezai xi, which originated 100 years ago in Ilan County, has developed and been enriched in the different environments on the two sides of the strait.

If it can be done in the fields of economy and culture, why should we not seek in the political and social spheres too to find areas of agreement while respecting each other's differences, and so enrich the Chinese world and help humanity advance into the future? Let us think about it together.