The One China policy refers to a United States policy of strategic ambiguity regarding Taiwan.[1] In a 1972 joint communiqué with the PRC, the United States "acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China" and "does not challenge that position."[2] It reaffirms the U.S. interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question.[3] The United States has formal relations with the PRC, recognizes the PRC as the sole legal government of China, and simultaneously maintains its unofficial relations with Taiwan while taking no official position on Taiwanese sovereignty.[4][5][6] The US "acknowledges" but does not "endorse" PRC's position over Taiwan,[7][8] and has considered Taiwan's political status as "undetermined".[9]
Internationally, it may also refer to the stance of numerous other countries. For instance, Australia's 1972 Joint Communiqué with the PRC recognised the Government of the PRC as China's sole legal government, and acknowledged the position of the PRC that Taiwan was a province of the PRC",[10] but "neither supports nor opposes the PRC position" on the matter.[11] While some countries, such as the UK, Canada, Australia, and Japan like the U.S. acknowledge but do not recognise the PRC's claim, the communiqués of some others, including Israel, Panama, and the Gambia, concurs with the PRC's interpretation.[12]
One China with respective interpretations refers to the interpretation of the 1992 Consensus asserted by the ROC's then-governing political party Kuomintang (KMT) that both the PRC and ROC had agreed that there is one "China", but disagreed on whether "China" is represented by the PRC or ROC.[15][16] This interpretation of the 1992 Consensus has not been accepted by the PRC.[17][18] The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the other major party of the ROC politics, has never acknowledged the existence of the so-called "1992 consensus" and also rejected any claim that both sides of the Taiwan Strait as "one China".[19]Lee Teng-hui, the President of the ROC from the KMT at the time, said no consensus had been reached in 1992 and claims to the contrary were "nonsense", and that the term was "something that former Mainland Affairs Council minister Su Chi (蘇起) fabricated to placate the KMT in 2000s", which Su conceded in 2006.[20]
Under ROC President Lee Teng-hui in the 1990s, the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China were passed which effectively transformed Taiwan from a one-party state into a democracy, and limited civil and political rights to citizens in the "free area" (the area under its de facto control, consisting of the island groups of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu and some minor islands), but did not alter language regarding territorial claims or national territory.[24] Subsequently, views on the One China principle in the ROC have been largely split along party lines: Pan-Blue coalition parties (including the Kuomintang) adhere to "One China with respective interpretations", while Pan-Green coalition parties (including the Democratic Progressive Party) reject it. Meanwhile, the PRC has maintained its One China principle.[25]
^Kan, Shirley A. (10 October 2014). "China/Taiwan: Evolution of the "One China" Policy—Key Statements from Washington, Beijing, and Taipei"(PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 39. Archived(PDF) from the original on 10 April 2017. Retrieved 7 March 2017 – via FAS Project on Government Secrecy. In the Chinese text, the word for "acknowledge" is "cheng ren" (recognize), a change from "ren shi" (acknowledge),used in the 1972 Shanghai Communique. During debate on the TRA in February 1979, Senator Jacob Javits noted the difference and said that "it is very important that we not subscribe to [the Chinese position on one China] either way." Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher responded that "we regard the English text as being the binding text. We regard the word 'acknowledge' as being the word that is determinative for the U.S." (Wolff and Simon, pp. 310-311).
^Shirley A. Kan; Wayne M. Morrison (4 January 2013). "U.S.-Taiwan Relationship: Overview of Policy Issues"(PDF). Congressional Research Service. p. 4. Archived from the original(PDF) on 11 December 2016. Retrieved 11 May 2017 – via Foreign Press Centers. The position of the United States, as clarified in the China/Taiwan: Evolution of the "One China" Policy report of the Congressional Research Service (date: July 9, 2007) is summed up in five points: 1. The United States did not explicitly state the sovereign status of Taiwan in the three US-PRC Joint Communiques of 1972, 1979, and 1982. 2. The United States "acknowledged" the "One China" position of both sides of the Taiwan Strait. 3. U.S. policy has not recognized the PRC's sovereignty over Taiwan; 4. U.S. policy has not recognized Taiwan as a sovereign country; and 5. U.S. policy has considered Taiwan's status as undetermined. U.S. policy has considered Taiwan's status as unsettled. These positions remained unchanged in a 2013 report of the Congressional Research Service.
^蔡, 儀潔 (27 July 2022). "陸委會指沒有九二共識 陸學者：民進黨將對抗責任「甩鍋大陸」". ETtoday (in Chinese (Taiwan)). Archived from the original on 27 July 2022. Retrieved 27 July 2022. 唐永紅(廈門大學台研院副主任)進一步闡述道，在「九二共識」指的是雙方同意「兩岸同屬一個中國、共同努力謀求國家統一」，並非所謂的「一中各表」，「各表」實乃兩岸之分歧而非共識，而當年國民黨及其當局故意在台灣把「九二共識」說成「一中各表」，意圖將「各表」也當成兩岸「共識」，大陸從未認可；事實上，依據兩岸各自有關法規，兩岸不能相互承認，也就是不能把「各表」作為兩岸共識 。
.svg)
China portal 
_cap_insignia.svg){kind=small}
.png){kind=small}
Taiwan portal 
