Straits Exchange Foundation? Or Straits Election Foundation?

Straits Exchange Foundation? Or Straits Election Foundation?
Hong Chi-chang's appointment to SEF Chairman
United Daily News editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
July 3, 2007

It was unexpected, but not totally unexpected. Hong Chi-chang will take over as Chairman of the Straits Exchange Foundation. Hong Chi-chang is regarded as a member of the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) "west bound faction." His appointment to the Straits Exchange Foundation could be considered a logical move. But precisely because he holds certain views on cross-Straits economics and trade, "Go West Chang" has been branded one of the "Eleven Brigands" within the DPP. He was subjected to such vilification that he couldn't even win the party's nomination for the legislature.

This is the Hong Chi-chang who will be taking over the position of Straits Exchange Foundation chairman. He will be subjected to questions from all directions. Blue camp lawmakers will assume he won't be able to get much done. Green camp high officials will wonder out loud "Will he sell out Taiwan?" But the real question is: If Hong Chi-chang takes over at the Straits Exchange Foundation, will he be able to break the deadlock in cross-Straits relations? Or is his appointment merely a way to appeal to the New Tide Faction within the party, a way to win the votes of mainland-based Taiwan businessmen?

The Straits Exchange Foundation originally performed a cross-Straits intermediary role. If hands are willing to reach out across the Taiwan Straits, then such an intermediary role has its uses. The SEF's very first chairman was Koo Chen-fu. His prestige and influence during his term was so great it overshadowed the policy making Mainland Affairs Council. But if the government's policy is to no longer reach out across the Taiwan Straits, then such an intermediary becomes useless. The SEF's second chairman Chang Chun-hsiung, by contrast, had no achievements to speak of during his term. No wonder, as former Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Su Chi said, during the seven years in which the DPP has been in power, "The Mainland Affairs Council formulates no policies, and the Straits Exchange Foundation conducts no negotiations," therefore it makes no difference who occupies these positions.

The DPP party hierarchy has picked Hong Chi-chang, a New Tide Faction elder who was vilified during the party primaries, as chairman of the SEF, when "it makes no difference who occupies this position." Can "Go West Chang" really allow cross-Straits policy to "Go West?" Or as Hong himself asked, was he was appointed merely "to ensure party unity and cooperation with the government's policies?"

"Go West Chang" is a member of the "non-mainstream faction" within the DPP. He has the image of a reformer. He worked with People First Party lawmaker Liu Yi-ju to sponsor a bill to relax the upper limit on business investments on the mainland to 40%. The bill quickly made it into committee, and the business community eagerly anticipated its passage. Needless to say, this proposal, along with bills for weekend cross-Straits charter flights, air cargo chartered flights, mainland tourist visits all turned out to be false alarms. No progress has been made. The bill became one of the main charges leveled against Hong Chi-chang when he sought the party's nomination for the legislature.

During the controversy over former Premier Su Tseng-chang's "Revisionist Su" path, Hong Chi-chang spoke frankly, saying that a cross-Straits Open Door Policy was inevitable. In his capacity as director of the Taiwan Economy and Industry Association, he submitted a letter to the media. He stressed the rise of the region's economy, saying that "Taiwan may soon be marginalized." He aggressively pleaded on behalf of industry, saying that "Our financial industries have been preparing to go west for a long time. All they need is an East Wind. Let's give the financial industry an East Wind. Don't make them wait until its too late."

Hong Chi-chang is known within the DPP as a maverick proponent of an Open Door Policy. He now occupies an important position responsible for cross-Straits affairs. He once called for "providing an East Wind for the finance industry." He may not be able to call the shots at the Straits Exchange Foundation. But he is probably not devoid of all influence. The question is, will he emulate first SEF chairman Koo Chen-fu, a latter day Zhu Geliang adept at strategy? Or will he imitate second SEF chairman Chang Chun-hsiung's policy, in which "The Mainland Affairs Council formulates no policies, and the Straits Exchange Foundation conducts no negotiations?"

Larger currents have landed Taiwan in a dangerous dilemma. Yet the only strategies its leaders concern themselves with are election strategies. On the one hand Hong Chi-chang has met with the Straits Exchange Foundation in an attempt to win over Taiwan businessmen. On the other hand Yu Hsi-kuen is attempting to fan Deep Green mob sentiment with his "Resolution for a Normal Nation."

Hong Chi-chang has assumed the chairmanship of the Straits Exchange Foundation. Will he be able to take a stand and make a fight, on the understanding that "Unless Taiwan immediately opens up, it will be marginalized?" Or will it be business as usual, on the understanding that "The DPP must present a united front" and "cooperate with the government's policies?" The answer to this question will bear on considerably more than Hong's personal reputation.

Original Chinese below:

洪奇昌掌海基會：兩岸思維或選舉炒作？
【聯合報╱社論】
2007.07.03 04:12 am

有點意外又不太意外，洪奇昌將接任海基會董事長。洪奇昌在民進黨內被視為「西進派」，出長海基會亦可謂順理成章。但正由於他對兩岸經貿有其見地，「西進昌」的大帽子也使他列名「十一寇」，以致被圍剿到連立委初選都過不了關。

這樣的洪奇昌，如今將接掌海基會，自是質疑四起。藍營立委認為他做不成什麼事，綠營高層則嗆聲他「會不會把台灣拿去賣掉」。但就台灣整體政局而言，關於此一人事任命，只有一個層面值得觀察：洪奇昌接掌海基會，能否為兩岸關係打開僵局？抑或只不過是民進黨對內拉攏新系、對外拉攏台商的選舉操作手段？

海基會原本扮演兩岸「白手套」的角色。兩岸的交流之「手」如果願意伸出，則「白手套」自有作用；第一任董事長辜振甫任內的聲譽及影響力，甚至凌駕決策單位的陸委會之上。但是，政策上如果決定不再伸出兩岸交流之「手」，則「白手套」即成無用之物。海基會第二任董事長張俊雄任內有過什麼「業績」，讓人實在想不出來。也難怪，前陸委會主委蘇起說，民進黨執政七年以來，「陸委會不決策，海基會不談判」，誰來做都一樣。

「誰來做都一樣」的這個職位，民進黨府院高層卻挑了在立委初選中被圍剿倒地的新系大老洪奇昌來做。「西進昌」真的能為兩岸政策打開西進的趨勢嗎？還是如洪奇昌本人所自稱，其臨危受命只不過是為了「民進黨內此時需要團結，會盡最大努力配合政府政策」？

「西進昌」在民進黨內雖屬「非主流」，卻具改革形象。他和親民黨立委劉憶如聯手提出放寬企業投資大陸百分之四十上限的提案，一度衝進付委審查的階段，受到企業界的高度期望。當然，這個提案就和兩岸周末包機、貨運包機、陸客觀光等案一樣，從傳言今年三月間「春暖花開」，到「春天過了，燕子還是沒有飛來」，如今仍不見任何進度，甚至成為洪奇昌爭取立委連任提名時受到黨內攻訐的主要罪名之一。

洪奇昌在前任閣揆蘇貞昌的「蘇修」路線廣受爭議時即大膽直言，兩岸政策「以開放為主軸」的趨勢已經確定了。他以台灣產經建研社理事長的身分投書媒體，強調區域經濟崛起的情勢中，「台灣就會陷入邊緣化的困境」；又積極為業者請命，「我們的金融業已準備好西進很久了，只是一直欠個東風，請借一個東風給金融業吧，不要讓他們等到地老天荒」。

以民進黨內倡議開放政策而堪稱特立獨行的洪奇昌，如今坐上了處理兩岸事務的重要職位。他過去呼籲「借一個東風給金融業吧」，如今在海基會的職權雖未必能呼風喚雨，但應不至於毫無影響力可言。問題是，他所欲效法的海基會「前輩」型範，將是喜好在舞台上扮演善用奇計孔明的第一任董事長辜振甫，還是恪守「陸委會不決策，海基會不談判」原則而默默無聲的第二任董事長張俊雄？

台灣走到今天這一步，外在大環境的潮流已使台灣處於退一步即無死所的險境之中；而國家領導人所步步經營者，仍無非選戰策略作多而已。眼前所見，正是一方面洪奇昌接海基會拉攏台商，另一方面游錫?搞「正常國家決議文」煽動深綠的政治奇觀。

洪奇昌接下海基會，將會在「台灣不開放即將邊緣化」的認知下而力求一搏？或只是在「民進黨需要團結」的認知下而「配合政府政策」？這個答案所影響的，不只是洪奇昌本人的功過評價而已。