Frank Hsieh's Concept of Nationhood

Frank Hsieh's Concept of Nationhood
United Daily News editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
July 30, 2007

While visiting the US, Frank Hsieh talked about the nation's plight. He said the public should have a sense of national consciousness and national identity. They must not refuse to acknowledge that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation".

His comments touched a sore spot in Taiwan's political discourse. The real problem is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) remains fixated on the premise that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation," and refuses to publicly acknowledge, in accordance with the constitution, that the "Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation."

If the assertion that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation," refers to a non-existent and fictitious "Republic of Taiwan," how can they expect people to identify with it? If on the other hand, the assertion that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation," refers to the Republic of China, why not simply and honestly state that the "Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation?"

The Taiwan independence movement's concept of nationhood has undergone two transformations. One. The Taiwan independence movement originally referred to the Republic of China as an "illegitimate political authority," demanded its overthrow, and demanded the establishment of a separate and independent Republic of Taiwan. Two. Ever since the DPP announced its "Resolution on Taiwan's Future," the DPP has asserted that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation, its current name is the Republic of China." Eventually the Taiwan independence movement's concept of nationhood will probably have to undergo a third transformation: "The Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation, and amounts to the realization of Taiwan independence." These three transformations are not based on any individual's whims, but reflect acquiescence to irresistible forces.

Today's Taiwan independence rhetoric remains stuck in the second stage: "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation, its current name is the Republic of China." This sort of political rhetoric has the power to persuade some swing voters. But it has no legal standing whatsoever, because in the world we live in there is no "Taiwan Constitution" or "Republic of Taiwan Constitution." Therefore "Taiwan" has never been the name of a nation with any constitutional foundation. The assertion that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation" is meaningless. Actually, it's worse than meaningless, as it can easily degenerate into self-deception. In the nomenclature of the Taiwan independence movement, "Taiwan" refers to a "Nation of Taiwan," as in "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation." In fact, this assertion is nothing more than an obstinate refusal to acknowledge that the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation. Current assertions that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation" are constructed upon the Republic of China's constitutional law foundation. If the Taiwan independence movement repudiates the Republic of China, then the assertion that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation" immediately loses its legal foundation.

On the one hand, the Taiwan independence movement spares no effort undermining the legitimacy of the Republic of China. It yearns to "rectify names," to "author a new constitution," and to abolish the Republic of China. On the other hand, the Taiwan independence movement's allegation that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation" has no basis in fact. Not only is there no nation named the "Republic of Taiwan," there is no "Constitution of Republic of Taiwan." That of course is precisely why the Taiwan independence movement demands the so-called "rectification of names," and the "authoring of a new constitution." As a result, when the Taiwan independence movement bandies about its concept of nationhood, Taiwan independence fundamentalists deny that they are Republic of China citizens. They refuse to consider anyone who identifies with the Republic of China as "Taiwanese." The Taiwan independence movement's concept of "nationhood" contradicts itself both externally and internally, both in name and in fact. Basically it fails the test of nationhood altogether.

On the one hand, the Taiwan independence movement's concept of nationhood struggles to undermine the Republic of China. On the other hand, it creates a fictitious "Republic of Taiwan." On the one hand it denies the reality of a Republic of China. On the other hand it fabricates a non-existent "Republic of Taiwan" Fantasyland. The Democratic Progressive Party needs to realize that its current concept of nationhood has created a Gordian Knot for itself. It will remain incapable of establishing a "Republic of Taiwan" because fundamentally speaking, it is nothing more than self-deception. The most they can do is undermine the Republic of China.

Frank Hsieh said that "Taiwan has already held presidential elections. Of course it is independent." This is political sophistry, not constitutional law. In the real world we live in no nation named "Taiwan" ever elected a "President of Taiwan." Only a nation named the Republic of China, founded upon the Republic of China Constitution, has ever elected presidents of the Republic of China. If Frank Hsieh is elected, he will be a president of the Republic of China, not a president of "Taiwan." Therefore what Frank Hsieh ought to say, loudly and with pride, is that the "Republic of China has already held presidential elections, therefore the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation."

Taiwan independence rhetoric must acknowledge that the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation. Otherwise the disingenuous assertion that "Taiwan is a sovereign and independent nation" will have even less basis in fact. From a Taiwan independence standpoint, Taiwan independence advocates are revolutionaries who wish to overthrow the Republic of China. But from the Republic of China's standpoint, Taiwan independence advocates are traitors to the Republic of China, who are betraying their nation. Do not mock the Republic of China. Do not engage in self-deception in order to "rectify names," to "author a new constitution," or undermine the Republic of China. Only by reaffirming the nationhood of the Republic of China, by reaffirming one's national identity as a Republic of China citizen, can one avoid tearing the Republic of China apart and unite the Republic of China against foreign influences.

Do not use a fictitious "Nation of Taiwan" to repudiate a real life Republic of China. Do not use party labels to create divisions between an alleged "native political regime" and an alleged "alien political regime." Do not divide people into enemy camps consisting of "Taiwanese" on the one side, and "non-Taiwanese" on the other. This is what Frank Hsieh as a presidential candidate must do to strengthen the concept of nationhood and national identity. Since Frank Hsieh is about to run for Republic of China president, how can he refuse to acknowledge that the Republic of China is a sovereign and independent nation?

與謝長廷談國家觀念
社論
【2007-07-28/聯合報/A2版/焦點】

謝長廷在美國談到國家處境；他認為國人應有國家觀念與國家認同，不要不承認「台灣是一個主權獨立的國家」。

這段話觸及了台灣政局的痛處，但問題的癥結卻正是在民進黨的國家觀念始終停留在「台灣是一個主權獨立的國家」的階段，未能遵照憲法公開認同「中華民國是一個主權獨立的國家」。

台灣是一個主權獨立的國家，倘是指子虛烏有的「台灣共和國」，如何教國人皆認同？台灣是一個主權獨立的國家，倘是指「中華民國」，則何不乾脆直說「中華民國是一個主權獨立的國家」？

台獨運動的「國家觀念」，歷經了兩個階段的遞嬗轉型。一、台獨早先指中華民國為非法政權，必欲推翻之，另建台灣共和國；二、至民進黨發表《台灣前途決議文》，則稱「台灣是一主權獨立的國家，現在的名字叫中華民國」。未來台獨論述的「國家觀念」恐須再經第三階段轉型，成為：「中華民國是一主權獨立的國家，這即是台灣獨立的實現。」這三階段的轉型，不隨個人意志為轉移，而是一必趨必至的遞嬗過程。

現今的台獨論述，仍停留在第二階段，亦即：「台灣是一主權獨立的國家，現在的名字叫中華民國。」這樣的論述，作為政治語言，確實較具騰挪游移的空間，但這種說法畢竟不具法律意義；因為，世界上並無一部「台灣憲法」或「台灣共和國憲法」，因此「台灣」從來不是具有憲法意義的國號，則自稱「台灣是一主權獨立的國家」，其實沒有憲政意義，反而極易淪為一種「自欺欺人」的政治操作。在台獨詞彙中，「台灣」就是指「台灣國」；稱「台灣是一主權獨立的國家」，其實是在諱言「中華民國是一主權獨立的國家」。但是，如今稱「台灣是一主權獨立的國家」，卻是建立在「中華民國」的架構之上；倘若台獨否定了「中華民國」，「台灣是一主權獨立的國家」的論述，亦立即失去憑藉。

一方面，台獨不遺餘力地否定「中華民國」的合法正當性，而欲以正名制憲等手段去終結中華民國；但是，另一方面，所謂「台灣是一主權獨立國家」的台獨論述又根本沒有憑據，既無「台灣共和國之國號」、又無「台灣共和國之憲法」（當然，這正是台獨主張正名制憲的理由）。於是，在台獨操作的「國家觀念」中，台獨基本教義派否認自己是「中華民國國民」，且又否認其他認同中華民國者為「台灣人」；這樣的「國家觀念」，表裡衝突，名實撕裂，也就根本不成其為「國家」了。

台獨的國家觀念，一方面摧毀「中華民國」的正當性，另一方面虛構「台灣共和國」的正當性；一方面否定「中華民國」的現實，另一方面偽造「台灣共和國」的幻境。民進黨應知：當前「國家觀念」的癥結，不在未能建立「台灣共和國」（因為那根本是「自欺欺人」），而在你們要毀滅中華民國。

謝長廷說：「台灣已經選舉總統了，當然已經獨立。」這仍是政治語言，而非憲法語言。因為，世界上並無一個稱為「台灣」的國家曾選舉過「台灣總統」；只有一個名為「中華民國」的國家、依「中華民國憲法」，選舉產生「中華民國總統」。謝長廷如果當選，他也是中華民國的總統，而不是台灣（國）的總統。那麼，照謝長廷的話說：「中華民國已經選舉總統，即應大聲說出中華民國是一個主權獨立的國家。」

台獨論述必須承認「中華民國是一主權獨立的國家」，否則連「台灣是一個主權獨立的國家」亦無所寄託。從台獨本位來看，台獨是主張推翻中華民國的革命者；但是從中華民國本位來看，台獨卻是背叛中華民國的竊國賊。勿再對中華民國冷嘲熱諷，亦勿再以「自欺欺人」的正名制憲欲置中華民國於死地；唯有建立這樣的「國家觀念」與「國家認同」，台灣才不會撕裂，也才能凝聚一致對外的力量。

不要用虛構的「台灣國」來否定實存的「中華民國」，也不要將政黨標籤化成「本土政權」或「外來（國）政權」，更不要將國人分成「台灣人」與「非台灣人」兩種仇敵；這是謝長廷以總統候選人對強化國家觀念與國家認同可為之努力，既然謝長廷都要選中華民國總統了，難道還能諱言中華民國是一個主權獨立的國家？