Monday, January 9, 2012

Scrapping the 1992 Consensus Would Harm Everyone on Taiwan

Scrapping the 1992 Consensus Would Harm Everyone on Taiwan
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 9, 2011

Summary: What will the repercussions of the presidential election be in the event one or the other candidate is elected? The answer is crystal clear. If one or the other political party is elected, economic policy, specifically income redistribution, will not undergo any immediate and significant changes. Cross-Strait relations however, will face a major watershed. We will either continue promoting cross-Strait reconciliation and cooperation, as we have for the past several years. Or, we will clash head on with the Mainland and cross-Strait relations will suffer a major setback. Reality is staring us in the face. When voters make their decision, they must not ignore reality. They must not indulge in wishful thinking.

Full Text Below:

What will the repercussions of the presidential election be in the event one or the other candidate is elected? The answer is crystal clear. If one or the other political party is elected, economic policy, specifically income redistribution, will not undergo any immediate and significant changes. Cross-Strait relations however, will face a major watershed. We will either continue promoting cross-Strait reconciliation and cooperation, as we have for the past several years. Or, we will clash head on with the Mainland and cross-Strait relations will suffer a major setback. Reality is staring us in the face. When voters make their decision, they must not ignore reality. They must not indulge in wishful thinking.

Every nation seeks to survive, prosper, and ensure that its citizens are treated with dignity. But merely wishing will not make it so. Every nation must adopt practical policies appropriate to its circumstances. We must understand our own situation before we can adopt the appropriate measures. Only then can we safeguard our nation's interests and promote our nation's prosperity.

President Ma Ying-jeou is seeking reelection. He and DPP presidential challenger Tsai Ing-wen, represent diametrically opposite cross-Strait policy paths. Ma Ying-jeou seeks continued reconciliation, exchanges, and cooperation; predicated upon the 1992 Consensus. Tsai Ing-wen refuses to recognize the 1992 Consensus and any opposes any changes resulting from its recognition.

The public on Taiwan wants to survive, prosper, and be treated with dignity. This is an aspiration shared by all the people. Increasing national prosperity means their own lives will also get better and better. The public on Taiwan faces a stark reality. In terms of history, culture, geography, economy, trade, non-governmental exchanges, and even sovereignty disputes, Taiwan and the Mainland are inseparable. This was true in the past. This is true in the present. And this will be true in the future. Particularly given the Mainland's growing international political power and economic influence, When Republic of China citizens on Taiwan determine their national destiny, the Mainland will always remain a factor.

Ma Ying-jeou seeks cross-strait reconciliation, based on the 1992 consensus and the ROC Constitution. The two sides may differ in their interpretations of the 1992 Consensus. One side may speak of "one China, different interpretations." The other side may speak of "different interpretations of one China." One side may speak of the Peoples Republic of China. The other side may speak of the Republic of China, But what is truly important, what is truly relevant to people's well-being, is that both sides are willing to reach some sort of consensus. Both sides are willing to allow the other to express its position, Both sides are willing to set aside disputes over sovereignty which cannot be currently resolved, and instead actively promote exchanges to improve relations.

By contrast, Tsai Ing-wen has on the one hand painted a rosy scenario. She has promised that, if elected, she will build a "Taiwan consensus." She has promised to continue holding consultations with the other side. She has promised to continue promoting cross-Strait economic and trade exchanges, She has promised to continue improving cross-Strait relations. She has promised to avoid stagnation and backpedaling. On the other hand, Tsai Ing-wen has blasted Ma Ying-jeou for ahdering to the 1992 Consensus and to the other side's one China principle. She says "eventual reunification is the price we will have to pay." Her categorical repudiation of the 1992 Consensus tells us she would pull the basis for cross-Strait reconciliation from under our feet.

What would be the result? The Chen regime sealed Taiwan off from the Mainland for eight years. In the end, just how much did he promote our national interests, enhance our dignity, and bolster our sovereignty? The answer is still fresh in our memories. If Tsai Ing-wen has an alternative better than the 1992 Consensus we would of course welcome it. But so far we do not see how Tsai Ing-wen can abandon the 1992 Consensus and still persuade the Mainland to honor existing efforts at reconcilation.

Cross-Strait policy cannot be limited to building castles in the air, Everyone has pipe dreams, What matters is what is feasible in reality. When the Mainland authorities make decisions, they too must cope with internal pressures. If they mishandle the Taiwan issue, they could go down in infamy. By handling matters in accordance with the 1992 Consensus, the Mainland authorities can at least offer the Mainland public an accounting. But if the foundation for exchanges is demolished, it will undermine existing cooperation. It will mean a serious setback for the doves in the Chinese Communist Party. Achieving smooth cross-Strait relations has not been easy. One can only imagine how far they might be set back.

Recently, many entrepreneurs have expressed support for the 1992 Consensus and for cross-Strait peace, Nevertheless Tsai Ing-wen blasted Ma Ying-jeou, and accused him of chummying up to wealthy conglomerates. This was an attempt to incite class hatred, an attempt to distract the public from its concerns about the potentially catastrophic impact on cross-Strait relations. Entrepreneurs hope that Taiwan can continue to enjoy a peaceful and stable environment. They hope to enjoy greater opportunities for economic prosperity. How are their concerns any different from the general public's?

No one wants to relinquish national sovereignty. This determination is shared by everyone on Taiwan. But national sovereignty and the dignity enjoyed by a nation's citizens depend upon national strength. A weak and isolated nation will find survival and prosperity difficult to maintain, It will find it difficult to be treated with respect in the international community. Those at a disadvantage need greater wisdom, ingenuity, and courage than those in a position of strength. They cannot ignore reality. They cannot act blindly and rashly. The past three and a half years have offered countless opportunities for cross-Strait economic and trade exchanges and business opportunities. The Republic of China has achieved visa free travel status with over 100 different countries. The nation's survival, prosperity, and the dignity of its citizens have all been enhanced. Ma Ying-jeou's cross-Strait policy has proven effective and practicable in a real world context. Does Tsai Ing-wen really believe she can win over voters merely by painting the rosy scenarios described above, without bothering to offer a better alternative?

廢棄九二共識 傷害台灣全民
2012-01-09中國時報

這次總統大選的抉擇究竟會帶來什麼影響,已經相當清楚,在經濟政策與所得分配上,不同的政黨執政未必會立即看到明顯的改變,但兩岸關係卻是面對著一個重大的分水嶺。或是繼續近年來和解合作的路線,或是陷入衝擊震盪與倒退。現實擺在眼前,選民在做決定時,不能有無視現實的一廂情願想法。

任何國家都要追求生存、發展與尊嚴。但願望歸願望,任何國家也都要在其所處的環境中操作,選擇適當可行的政策。因此,正確認識自我條件與外在環境,因應現實選擇合適措施,才能有效維護國家利益增進發展。

尋求連任的馬英九總統與民進黨總統候選人蔡英文,恰是代表了兩岸關係兩條方向不同的路線。馬英九提出的,是延續他以「九二共識」為基礎的和解、交流與合作;蔡英文代表的,則是不接受「九二共識」,及任何因之而來的變化。

台灣需要生存、發展與尊嚴,這是所有人共同的願望;大家也都希望,在國家愈來愈繁榮茁壯的同時,自己的生活也能愈來愈好。而台灣面對的現實環境是,無論在歷史、文化、地理、經貿、民間交流乃至主權爭議上,台灣與中國的關係千絲萬縷,過去、現在、未來,都不可能徹底切斷。尤其以中國日益增長的政經力量與國際影響力,台灣在決定國家走向時,都必須考慮並處理中國大陸這個變數。

馬英九以「九二共識」、中華民國憲法為架構,為兩岸和解找到了立足基礎。雖然兩岸對「九二共識」的解讀不同,一邊是「一中各表」一邊是「各表一中原則」,一邊是中華人民共和國一邊是中華民國,但真正重要、並攸關人民福祉的是,雙方願意在一個最起碼的模糊共識下,以容許對方各說各話的態度,放下目前解決不了的主權爭執,轉而積極推動交流改善關係。

相對的,蔡英文一方面畫出願景,表示若當選,會建立台灣共識,持續與對岸協商,讓兩岸經貿等交流持續推展,兩岸關係只會持續前進,不會停滯或倒退;但另一方面,又指責馬英九堅持九二共識是附和對岸的一中原則,將以「終極統一」為代價。這種全盤否定「九二共識」存在的立場,意味著將把現在兩岸和解的重要立足基礎,從我們的腳下抽走。

結果會如何?扁政府八年鎖國,到底增進了哪些國家利益與主權尊嚴,大家記憶猶新。蔡英文如果提得出一個比「九二共識」更好的處理方案,大家當然很歡迎,但是到目前為止,完全看不到廢棄了「九二共識」後,蔡英文有什麼足以說服中國延續現行和解政策的方案或論述。

兩岸政策不能只是空中樓閣,夢想人人會做,重點在於在現實中有效可行。中共當局在決策時,也必須面對自己內部的壓力與角力,如果台灣問題處理失了立場,豈非成了千古罪人?以「九二共識」模式處理,至少中共當局對內部交待得過去。如果毀棄了這個交流基礎,不只勢將衝擊現行各項合作交流,而且讓中共內部和解派受到挫折,好不容易獲致良性發展的兩岸關係,又不知要倒退到什麼地步。

近來許多企業家紛紛表態支持「九二共識」與兩岸和平,蔡英文卻批評為馬英九和大財團在一起,這是藉挑起階級對立掩蓋民間對兩岸衝擊的憂心。企業家希望台灣能繼續在和平穩定的環境下擴大發展機會,其心情與一般民眾有什麼不同?

沒有人願意出讓國家主權,這個骨氣,每個台灣人都有,然而,主權尊嚴是要靠國力支撐的,一個孱弱孤立的國家,生存發展既困難,又難以在國際間受到正視。國家尊嚴固然必須維護,但處於劣勢者,更需要智慧、手腕與勇氣,不能無視現實一味蠻幹。驗諸三年半來兩岸經貿交流的蓬勃商機、台灣在國際社會的參與乃至百國免簽的達成,國家的生存、發展、尊嚴都得到了強化,證明馬英九的兩岸政策是在現實環境中有效可行的。光是描繪空洞願景,卻端不出更好的替代方案,如何說服選民?

No comments: