Taipei and Beijing are Pursuing Peace: Is the DPP Ready?

Taipei and Beijing are Pursuing Peace: Is the DPP Ready?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 26, 2012

Summary: The DPP has long boasted that it is diligent, close to the people, and close to the land. It has used every trick in the book to seize power. Perhaps this is normal for partisan politics under a democracy. But the DPP should adopt a more elevated perspective. It should think about how to promote win-win cross-strait relations, about how to coexist and prosper. This is the solution to the problem. But it involves issues of national identity and personal identity. Is the DPP really ready? Probably not.

Full Text below:

On the 22nd of this month, the DPP established a "China Affairs Committee." Su Tseng-chang will be its convener. The committee will "develop strategies for cross-Strait exchanges between Taiwan and China." The consensus is that this committee was established in response to former Chairman Frank Hsieh's Mainland visit. The consensus is that the DPP established this committee hurriedly, under duress. Its establishment led to public concern and shared concern among party factions. It was originally meant to be a permanent body. Now party members want to make it an ad hoc entity. They want to formulate a new response to Beijing's strategies and tactics. It appears a new round of internecine struggles is brewing within the DPP.

The result of the January presidential election showed that cross-Strait relations remains the DPP's biggest Achilles Heel. The public on Taiwan feels the DPP's policy of enmity toward the Chinese mainland is at odds with political stability, economic growth, and cross-Strait peace. No wonder even Tsai Ing-wen said that the DPP must increase its interaction with, and its understanding of, the Chinese mainland. Following the election everyone hoped the DPP would promptly initiate an intraparty policy debate on cross-Strait relations. This would enable it to determine the cause for its defeat. It would enable it to adopt a new policy path. Obviously this never happened.

The DPP must be rational and pragmatic. It must gradually alter its separatist ideology, and its relentlessly Sinophobic political calculations. Outsiders should not expect the DPP to alter its Mainland policy any time soon. It will take time for the DPP to adopt a pragmatic attitude. But everyone agrees that the DPP should change some of its practices. For example, it should establish a Mainland Affairs Department or Cross-Strait Relations Committee. This would tell the public on Taiwan that it is changing. It would amount to an expression of goodwill toward the Chinese mainland. Alas, this proposal has also fallen on barren ground.

Su Tseng-chang hurriedly established a China Affairs Committee. Most people on Taiwan think Chairman Su was pandering to Taiwan independence hardliners, that they hijacked him. Cooperation between Su and Frank Hsieh was aborted. Actually, Su was probably attempting to block both Tsai Ing-wen and Frank Hsieh. He was appealing to Yu Hsi-kun and sidelining Annette Lu. No wonder people are blasting Su Tseng-chang as self-serving. They are saying "He wants to control everything. But in the end he will end up with nothing." The leader of a major political party is thinking only about how to promote himself. Is this any way to begin anew?

The veiled rivalry between Su and Hsieh is hardly news. Frank Hsieh once argued that Kaohsiung and Xiamen were two cities within the same nation. He now argues that the ROC Constitution stipulates that there is only one China. This led to veiled criticisms from Su, who said, "Anyone who wants to cozy up to China for the sake of votes should join the KMT." Clearly the DPP is refusing to support Frank Hsieh's cross-Strait policy. This is a struggle between two paths. It is difficult to avoid comparisons with Su's criticism of Hsieh four years ago. Su said changing the subject would not change the facts of the case. His criticism of Hsieh was devious. It left people in shock. With friends like this, does the DPP need enemies?

The DPP has long been criticized for its McCarthyite political smears. It is willing to do anything for power. It has no qualms about violating society's ethical standards, in order to incite class antagonisms. It has no problem ignoring right and wrong. Its Taiwan Independence Party Platform and its Resolution on Taiwan's Future, have proven to be dead ends, impossible to realize. Frank Hsieh's "constitutional one China" has been relatively progressive. But the Su Tseng-chang-led DPP will not tolerate any such proposals. Therefore who dares to put his hopes on the DPP?

The DPP's current plight involves more than the question of whether to recognize the 1992 consensus. It involves how to handle relations with the Chinese mainland. Mainland reform began in 1978. In 1988, the government on Taiwan allowed the public on Taiwan to visit their relatives on the Mainland. For several decades, the two sides pitted their strength against each other. Now bilateral exchanges have expanded to unimaginable proportions. The international environment is also very different from what it was back then. President Chiang Ching-kuo said the times are changing. Frank Hsieh also says the situation has changed. If people refuse to change, they will precipate tragedy. The DPP must beware.

Whether the KMT or DPP is in office does not matter. The ROC needs a rational, moderate, and healthy system of checks and balances. This is something about which everyone agrees. One must change with the times. One must liberate one's thinking. The CCP succeeeded over the past thirty years because it liberalized. Anyone who understands the international situation, anyone with any diplomatic experience, knows that Taiwan independence separatism is an unachievable dead end. Otherwise, Chen Shui-bian would not have complained that "It can't be done means it can't be done. There is no need to deceive ourselves." Where will the DPP go from here? The answer should be self-evident. But has Su Tseng-chang heard or understood?

The DPP has long boasted that it is diligent, close to the people, and close to the land. It has used every trick in the book to seize power. Perhaps this is normal for partisan politics under a democracy. But the DPP should adopt a more elevated perspective. It should pursue cross-Strait coexistence and coopetition. It should undergoe a peaceful transition. It should seek solutions acceptable to both sides. It should think about how to promote win-win cross-strait relations, about how to coexist and prosper. This is the solution to the problem. But it involves issues of national identity and personal identity. Is the DPP really ready? Probably not.

兩岸追求和平 民進黨準備好了？
    2012-11-26
    中國時報

　二十二日民進黨成立中國事務委員會，由蘇貞昌出任召集人，並將其定位為「制定台灣有關中國政策與兩岸交流策略。」一般認為，這是為了因應前主席謝長廷訪陸而來，臨時在不得不成立的情況下倉促上路，結果引來社會疑慮及黨內跨派系之間的結合，要把這個原本定位為常設組織的機構變為任務編組，要求從新擬定應對北京的戰略與策略。看來新一回合的民進黨內鬥爭恐將再起。

　今年一月總統大選結果顯示，兩岸關係仍是民進黨最大罩門，台灣民眾並不認為民進黨對中國大陸具有強烈敵意的政策符合大多數人民求安定、要發展、重和平的最大利益。難怪連蔡英文事後也說，民進黨須在互動中加強對中國大陸的了解。選後各界期望，民進黨早日進行黨內中國政策大辯論，不但要找出敗選的癥結，也更要擬定新的發展方向，但顯然事與願違。

　除非民進黨能夠漸進、理性、務實的改變其分離主義的意識形態及其逢中必反的政治算計和權力邏輯，外界對於民進黨短期內調整其大陸政策並無太高期望，畢竟事務的發展得有一段過程，但各界確曾主張，民進黨如果能夠先在某些做法上微調，比如說成立大陸事務部或兩岸關係委員會，這也是對台灣民眾釋放漸變的訊息，對中國大陸表達善意的一種方式，但這種建議同樣泥牛入海。

　對這次蘇貞昌倉促成立中國事務委員會，台灣各界多半認為，這是蘇主席對獨派的交心或受彼等綁架，與謝長廷的合作破局，但究其實際，其中恐怕更大的程度是要堵蔡（英文）、卡謝（長廷）、拉游（錫?）、忘呂（秀蓮）。難怪有人要痛批蘇貞昌師心自用，「什麼都要自己來，最後反而什麼都沒有」。一個主要政黨的領導人如果一心想的只是要為自己尋找熱帶氣旋，從新出發，這樣豈是正道？

　蘇、謝之間的瑜亮情節早為眾所皆知，謝長廷過去主張一國兩市，如今又有憲法一中的看法，結果被蘇暗批，「如為選舉親中，那就去國民黨」，表明了民進黨拒絕謝長廷所支持的兩岸政策，這就是一種路線鬥爭，這難免又讓人想起四年多前，蘇對於謝的批評，竟指其轉移焦點不能改變涉案的事實，批評謝的奸巧，簡直讓人瞠目結舌，有這樣的朋友（或同志），民進黨哪還需要再有任何敵人？

　民進黨向來為人所詬病的是擅長給人戴帽子、打棍子，為了權力不擇手段，即使破壞社會倫常，製造階級對立，不講是非道理也都在所不惜。不管是台獨黨綱、或台灣前途決議文已經證明窒礙難行、沒有出路，而如謝長廷憲法一中這種相對較為進步，雖然還有進一步思辯空間的主張也不能見容於蘇貞昌所主導的民進黨，今後有誰還敢再對民進黨寄予希望？

　其實，民進黨今天的困境不但牽涉到認同九二共識與否的問題，更在究竟要如何正確處理、面對與中國大陸之間的關係。一九七八年中共改革開放，一九八八年台灣開放探親，幾十年來兩岸實力對比，雙邊交流已經深化到難以想像的地步，而國際大環境與當年已有非常大的不同。蔣經國總統當年說過，時代在變、潮流在變，謝長廷也引述說，情勢已變，人若不變將釀悲劇，民進黨可不慎乎？

　其實，不管國、民兩黨是誰執政，台灣需要一個理性、中道、健康的監督制衡力量這已成全民共識，如果說與時俱進、解放思想、對外開放是過去三十多年中共成功的原因，而所有具有國際知識與涉外經驗的人都知道，台獨分離主義已是一條行不通的死路，否則陳水扁也不會有做不到就是做不到，不要再自欺欺人的講話，民進黨的何去何從已經不言自明，蘇貞昌聽到或聽懂了嗎？

　勤政、愛民、愛鄉土理所當然，機關算盡、黨同伐異或許也是民主政治常態，但如民進黨能由更宏觀戰略高度出發，由追求兩岸和平共處及和平競賽出發，再和平過渡到一個雙方都能接受的最終解決，思考如何將兩岸關係進一步引領往互利雙贏、共存共榮境地，這才是一切問題根本。但這裡面牽涉到的國家定位及自我認同問題，民進黨真的準備好了嗎？恐怕沒有！