Thursday, April 26, 2012

Taiwan Independence: The Vestigial Tail on the DPP Dog

Taiwan Independence: The Vestigial Tail on the DPP Dog
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
April 25, 2012

Summary: Following the presidential election, Taiwan independence elements repeatedly said, "We have not ruled founding another party, outside the DPP." But the Taiwan Independence Party has been around for years. So has the the Taiwan Solidarity Union. Clearly founding yet another party will not save the Taiwan independence movement. Therefore the DPP must confront reality. It must shed its vestigial Taiwan independence tail.

Full Text below:

During the Democratic Progressive Party's campaign for the presidency, it became abundantly clear that Taiwan independence is a vestigial tail on the Democratic Progressive Party dog.

The expression "the tail wagging the dog" denotes a subsidiary force so powerful that it influences or even dominates the main force. Taiwan independence was once a powerful tail attached to the DPP dog. It had enough energy to wag the dog. It could be viewed as a case of "the tail wagging the dog." But in recent years conditions have changed  dramatically, both inside the nation and around the world. The Taiwan independence tail has atrophied and weakened. It has even become diseased. It no longer has enough energy to wag the dog. It could be viewed as a "vestigial organ." This Taiwan independence tail may not have the ability to wag the dog. Nevertheless it remains an albatross around the party's neck, one the party cannot remove, and one that is taking the party down with it.

The recent DPP party chairman election showed that Taiwan independence forces are neither able to lead the party, nor willing to obey it. For the DPP, they are a dilemma. Su Huan-chih was the first to announce his candidacy for party chairman. Next, Taiwan independence forces backed Wu Rong-i. Su Tseng-chang had yet to declare his candidacy. Taiwan independence elder Yao Chia-wen openly accused Su Tseng-chang of failing to ever mention the term "Taiwan independence." Yao said, "I do not think Su Tseng-chang is sufficiently Taiwan-centric or pro Taiwan independence." He airily branded Su Tseng-chang "Not one of us."

During past party chairman elections, Taiwan independence forces made certain moves. For example, in 2008, Taiwan independence elder Koo Kwan-min challenged Tsai Ing-wen. But he never accused Tsai Ing-wen of being "insufficiently Taiwan-centric or pro Taiwan independence." During the recent election however, Taiwan independence candidates sank to Wu Rong-i's level. If they were merely reminding voters that Taiwan independence candidates were still in the picture, that would have been understandable. But Wu Rong-i and Trong Chai, who had yet to declare his candidacy, had no chance of being elected party chairman. Yet they rudely and loudly accused Su Tseng-chang of "not being sufficiently Taiwan-centric or pro Taiwan independence." What sort of logic was that?

When Yao Chia-wen leveled his accusation, Hsu Hsin-liang had yet to make his move. Soon afterward, Hsu Hsin-liang entered the party chairmanship race. He declared he was "fighting for Tsai Ing-wen's policy path." He said he "supported a second Tsai Ing-wen presidential bid in 2016." This immediately led to the formation of two opposing factions within the DPP. One faction was represented by people such as Julian J. Kuo. Kuo said that Hsu's candidacy "set off two depth charges." One, Hsu linked the party chairmanship election to the 2016 presidential election. Two, Hsu made cross-Strait policy the issue. The other faction was represented by people such as Chin Heng-wei. Chin called Hsu Hsin-liang "dog shit." He accused Hsu of "using" Tsai Ing-wen. He accused Hsu of "using a tiger skin as a banner."

As matters stand, the DPP can expect two heavyweights to run in 2016. But both of these have been repudiated by Taiwan independence forces. Su Tseng-chang has been denounced as "not sufficiently Taiwan-centric or pro Taiwan independence." Many Taiwan independence hardliners hoped that Tsai Ing-wen would make another run at the presidency in 2016. But they see Hsu Hsin-liang using Tsai Ing-wen as his proxy. They hate Hsu Hsin-liang's cross-Strait policy leanings. Therefore they would rather withdraw their support for Tsai Ing-wen, smear Su Tseng-chang, and block Tsai Ing-wen. The Taiwan independence forces' bark is worse than its bite. Just exactly what role will it play in the party chairmanship election?

Taiwan independence is impossible. But consider the political views of the two Taiwan independence candidates for party chairman. Wu Rong-i advocates a "refounding of the party." Trong Chai advocates "redoubling efforts to lobby the U.S." and "the addition of a party vice chairman." Why don't the two candidates advocate Taiwan independence? Yao Chia-wen blasted Su Tseng-chang for failing to mention the term "Taiwan independence." But according to Yao, the party chairman has three functions: "party reform, resistance to the Ma administration's tilt toward [Mainland] China, and dealing with Ah-Bian." Lo and behold, he made no mention whatsoever of "Taiwan independence."

In the past, the DPP openly proclaimed its support for Taiwan independence. But it never bothered to consult the general public. It never resolved the problems surrounding Taiwan independence. Today, however, the problem is Taiwan independence elements who dare not declare their support for Taiwan independence. They resort to euphemisms such as "one country on each side." Or they resort to backdoor listing, such as the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." Taiwan independence elements are afraid to mention the term "Taiwan independence." This makes the problems surrounding Taiwan independence even more difficult to resolve. Taiwan independence elements accuse Su Tseng-chang of "not being sufficiently Taiwan-centric or pro Taiwan independence." But Taiwan independence candidates themselves categorically refuse to mention the term "Taiwan independence." What is this, except self-deception?

Taiwan independence elements are guilty of two blunders. One. They inextricably linked Taiwan independence to a convicted embezzler -- Chen Shui-bian. They equated "Taiwan independence" with "Save Ah-Bian." But for most people on Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian was an unending nightmare. Two. Taiwan independence elements have reached an impasse. But they refuse to allow the DPP to take an alternate path. Is Su Tseng-chang really not pro Taiwan independence? Is Tsai Ing-wen really revisionist? The two represent the DPP's only chance of survival. Yet Taiwan independence hardliners persist in smearing Su Tseng-chang and blocking Tsai Ing-wen. Are we to understand that Wu Rong-i, Trong Chai, or Su Huan-chih will save the DPP?

Following the presidential election, Taiwan independence elements repeatedly said, "We have not ruled founding another party, outside the DPP." But the Taiwan Independence Party has been around for years. So has the the Taiwan Solidarity Union. Clearly founding yet another party will not save the Taiwan independence movement. Today, Taiwan independence elements within the DPP grow weaker by the day. The stinger on a scorpion's tail may be small. But it can prevent people from becoming friendly with the scorpion. Therefore the DPP must confront reality. Washington, Beijing. and most voters on Taiwan have a problem with the stinger on the scorpion's tail. Therefore the DPP must shed its vestigial Taiwan independence tail.

民進黨內「尾小不掉」的台獨
【聯合報╱社論】 2012.04.25

在此次民進黨黨主席選舉的景況中,可見台獨在民進黨內已呈「尾小不掉」之局。

一般習稱「尾大不掉」,是說附屬勢力逐漸坐大後,影響並支配了主體;台獨在民進黨中原本是一條強有力的大尾巴,具有「尾巴搖狗」的能量,可稱「尾大不掉」。但是,經由近幾年來國情世局丕變,台獨這條尾巴顯然已經縮小、耗弱,甚至發生嚴重病變,亦無「尾巴搖狗」的能量,已呈「尾小不掉」之局;但這條台獨尾巴,雖已無力「搖狗」,卻仍使該黨脫不掉台獨的項圈,足以把它拖垮。

此次民進黨黨主席選舉,充分顯現台獨勢力「既不能令,又不受命」的兩難處境。蘇煥智率先宣告參選黨主席,接著獨派推出吳榮義;當時,蘇貞昌尚未表態,獨派大老姚嘉文卻公開指稱:蘇貞昌從來沒有講過「台獨」、或「台灣獨立」,「我不認為蘇貞昌是台派、獨派」。一句話,就給蘇貞昌貼下了「非我族類」的標籤。

在歷屆黨主席選舉中,獨派皆有動作;例如,二○○八年,獨派大老辜寬敏甚至出馬挑戰蔡英文,但也未曾把蔡英文說成「不是台派、獨派」。如今,在此次選舉中,獨派參選者的資望已下降至吳榮義的層次,若謂只是要作出「台獨不缺席」的姿態,尚可理解;但如今竟然是在吳榮義(及當時尚未表態的蔡同榮)絕不可能當選黨主席的態勢下,粗暴地將呼聲最高的蘇貞昌說成「不是台派、獨派」,這究竟是什麼學問?

姚嘉文說此話時,許信良尚無動靜;待許信良打著「為蔡英文路線而戰」、「支持小英再戰二○一六」的口號加入黨主席選戰,立即使民進黨內形成對立的兩派。一派如郭正亮稱,許的參選,「引爆兩顆深水炸彈」:「黨主席與二○一六掛鉤」及「兩岸政策」。另一派則如金恆煒,指許信良為「狗屁」,是在「利用」蔡英文,「拉虎皮當大旗」。

事態至此,民進黨可望前進二○一六的兩大天王人物,皆遭獨派否定。一方面,蘇貞昌被指為「不是台派、獨派」;另一方面,縱使許多獨派對蔡英文再戰二○一六仍寄厚望,但如今明知許信良打的是蔡英文的「代理人戰爭」,卻因厭惡許信良的兩岸政策傾向,也就寧可不顧惜蔡英文了。抹黑蘇貞昌,堵住蔡英文,獨派的嗓門不成比例地大過其實力,究竟欲在此次黨主席選舉扮演何種角色?

台獨已絕無可為。且看兩名獨派的黨主席參選者的政見:吳榮義主張「二次創黨」,蔡同榮主張「加強對美國遊說工作」及「增設黨副主席」。請問:為何不見二人主張「台灣獨立」或「台獨」?甚至,姚嘉文批評蘇貞昌不講「台灣獨立」或「台獨」,但他在自己標舉的黨主席三大功能「黨務改革/抵抗馬政府傾中/處理扁問題」之中,竟然也沒有「台灣獨立」或「台獨」。

在過去,民進黨公開宣示「台獨」,倒尚可經社會辯論來化解問題;然而,如今的問題卻是,台獨人士現在已不敢再公開宣示「台獨」,不是用「一邊一國」的「化名」,就是用「台灣前途決議文」的「借殼」,「台獨」不說「台獨」,這遂使得問題更不易化解。現在,獨派指蘇貞昌「不是台派、獨派」,但獨派參選者自己竟亦絕口不提「台獨」、「台灣獨立」。這豈不是自欺欺人?

現今台獨操作的根本謬誤有二:一、把台獨與貪污犯陳水扁綁在一起,甚至將「台獨」與「救扁」畫上等號;但陳水扁對大多數台灣人而言,只是一場夢魘。二、台獨自己走不下去,卻不容民進黨另尋活路。倘若蘇貞昌真的不是「獨派」,且「蔡英文路線」也象徵著「修正主義」,那倒是民進黨的一線生機。但獨派像現在這樣抹黑蘇貞昌、堵住蔡英文,難道是要吳榮義、蔡同榮,或蘇煥智來拯救民進黨?

總統大選後,常聞獨派說,「不排除另外組黨」;但早先已有建國黨,如今仍有台聯,可見「另外組黨」也救不了台獨。如今在民進黨內的台獨因素已是日漸耗弱,但猶如蠍子的尾針雖小,卻可使整隻蠍子讓人不敢親近;於是,民進黨必須正視台灣多數選民、華府,及北京對這一截小尾針的看法,不要「尾小不掉」。

No comments: