The Olympic Flame Dispute: No ROC Flag, No Status Quo

The Olympic Flame Dispute: No ROC Flag, No Status Quo
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 11, 2007

The Olympic Flame controversy has, no pun intended, flared up once more. This time the cause is the upcoming presidential election and escalating moves toward Taiwan independence. This time the controversy is not limited to whether the Republic of China (ROC) flag may appear along the route of the Olympic Flame. This time Beijing must choose between the Republic of China and a would be "State of Taiwan."

When Taiwan independence was hidden and covert, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) hemmed in the Republic of China (ROC) using every means at its disposal. The CCP's attacks against the ROC, its denial of the ROC's legitimacy, became a major factor in the development of Taiwan independence. Each time the CCP diminished the ROC, it aggrandized Taiwan independence. The situation has worsened to the point where the CCP must see that the harder it comes down on the ROC, the more it boosts Taiwan independence.

The Olympic Flame controversy is a clear illustration. In the past, the CCP maintained a Closed Door Policy. The two sides of the Taiwan Strait had no contacts and no exchanges. The internal politics of the Taiwan region were relatively simple. The "Olympic Committee Model" was still internationally viable, right up to the opening of cross Straits exchanges. Taiwan's internal political struggles then became more complex and bitter. Attempts to prevent spectators on Taiwan from waving ROC flags naturally provoked protests. The word now is that Beijing wants to prevent the appearance of ROC flags along the route of the Olympic Flame. This shows even more clearly the changes since the formulation of the "Olympic Committee Model." After all, the original intent was to limit only the flags and anthems used by the local sponsor of the sports event. Extending these limitations to the spectators is unreasonable. Extending these limitiations to the streets of Taiwan along the route of the Olympic Flame is totally unacceptable.

The CCP opposes Taiwan independence. But it must leave the Taiwan region an alternative. Apart from the Republic of China, there is no alternative. The situation in the Taiwan Straits was once a standoff between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the ROC. But now the CCP must make a choice between the ROC and a would be "State of Taiwan." As many point out, if Beijing cannot tolerate the sight of red, white and blue ROC flags along the route of the Olympic Flame, would it prefer the sight of streets lined wtih green "State of Taiwan" flags?

We have entered an era that "does not permit unilateral changes to the status quo." We have entered an era in which we must choose between the "Republic of China" (status quo) or a would be "State of Taiwan" (changing the status quo). Beijing has decided that only de jure independence in the form of "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution" is true Taiwan independence. Preserving the ROC is not Taiwan independence. Therefore Beijing ought to allow the ROC to survive with dignity. If the ROC is no longer able to survive, then Taiwan independence will gather increasing momentum. And the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will inevitably clash one day.

The impact of the "Olympic Flame/ROC flag" controversy is every bit as serious as the "Join the UN/Rejoin the UN" controversy. Many regard the "Join the UN/Rejoin the UN" as an election ploy, merely a Blue vs. Green political tug-of-war. The "Join the UN/Rejoin the UN" issue may involve issues of national dignity and national identity. But it is primarily a Blue vs. Green test of strength. By contrast, the "Olympic Flame/ROC flag" battle will take place on Taiwan soil, along Taipei streets. If the ROC flag is banned, if public and private bodies along the route of the Olympic Flame are compelled to lower their ROC flags, it will certainly turn into a direct test of strength between Beijing authorities and the public on Taiwan. The psychological impact on Taiwan society will be inestimable. If the Beijing authorities forbid the display of ROC flags along the route of the Olympic Flame, they will antagonize everyone on Taiwan, Blue and Green alike.

How the "Olympic Flame/ROC flag" incident will play out is not yet clear. Ma Ying-jeou and Frank Hsieh have said they will carry ROC flags with them when they welcome the Olympic Flame. Ma Ying-jeou announced his "Five Principles concerning the Flag and the Anthem." He proposed that henceforth sporting events and the audience be separated. That way the audience will not be denied the right to wave flags and sing the anthem. We fear altercations within the grandstands at Olympic venues. This sort of backlash from the "Olympic Flame/ROC flag" incident is inevitable.

These changes in the Taiwan Straits situation have occurred because the DPP is currently in power. For the DPP, the only distinction remaining between the "Republic of China" and "Taiwan independence" is a paper distinction, the "rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution." If the Republic of China flag continues flying over the presidential palace and other government buildings, then the Republic of China's status quo can be maintained. But if the Beijing authorities forbid the flying of the ROC flag along the route of the Olympic Flame, it will seriously impact the status quo. It will add fuel to the fire of Taiwan independence, and provoke demands for change. The Beijing authorities must understand that the ROC, with its red, white, and blue flag, is an important factor in the maintenance of the status quo.

The status quo in the Taiwan Strait is: The Republic of China or a would be "State of Taiwan?" Which offers a way out? Beijing must choose between the Republic of China and a would be "State of Taiwan." If it opposes changes to the status quo but prohibits the appearance of the ROC flag along the route of the Olympic Flame, then the "status quo" will be difficult to maintain, and the cross Straits crisis will inevitably become more serious.

Without the Republic of China flag, there is no "status quo" in the Taiwan Straits.

聖火紀事：沒有國旗，豈有現狀？
【聯合報╱社論】
2007.09.11 03:34 am

奧運聖火，又生波折。此事發生在因總統大選而台獨操作升高之際，所涉及的已不僅是聖火來台沿途可否出現國旗的問題，而是北京的台海政策必須在中華民國與台灣國之間作一抉擇的問題。

往昔，在台獨隱伏之時，中共全面圍堵中華民國；而中共打壓和否定中華民國，亦成為台獨發展的主要背景因素。中共每削減中華民國一分，就為台獨增添一分。爾今情勢急轉直下，惡化至如此地步，中共當局應當已經看出這個蹺蹺板；愈打壓中華民國，台獨的聲勢就愈高漲。

聖火爭議是一鮮明例證。過去，中共鎖國，兩岸不接觸、不交流，台灣內部政治亦相對較為單純之時，「奧會模式」在國際場合尚可維持；及至兩岸開放交流，台灣內部的政治鬥爭既複雜又尖銳，欲限制在台灣本土觀看比賽的民眾亦不可持國旗，自然屢生爭議。如今，竟又傳出北京方面有禁止聖火沿途出現國旗的主張，更加顯示時空的變異已經超出了當年制定「奧會模式」時的想像。畢竟，原是針對賽事當局及參賽者規定的旗歌限制，欲延伸至賽場觀眾已非合理，如今若再欲擴大至聖火沿途的台灣城市空間，這自是絕無可能接受之事。

中共反對台獨，但總要讓台灣有一條路可走，而捨中華民國之外，別無他途。過去，台海情勢或許是中華人民共和國與中華民國的對決，但如今則已成中共須在中華民國或台灣國之間作一抉擇之勢。正如許多人指出，聖火來台，若不容出現青天白日滿地紅國旗，難道北京希望看到沿路皆是台灣國的旗幟迎接聖火？

海峽情勢進入「不容片面改變現狀」的時代，其實就是已經進入必須在「中華民國」（現狀）或「台灣國」（改變現狀）之間作一抉擇的階段。北京當局既認定「正名制憲」的「法理台獨」才是「台獨」，而「中華民國」非屬台獨；則北京理當讓「中華民國」能夠維持生機與尊嚴。若中華民國亦無活路，自使台獨的聲勢攀高不下，如此則兩岸難免會有對撞的一天。

「聖火／國旗」事件的影響未必小於「入聯／返聯」議題。許多人皆視「入聯／返聯」為選戰手法，只是藍綠的政治拔河而已；因而，「入聯／返聯」雖亦涉及國家尊嚴及民族主義的操作，但仍以藍綠相互角力的成分居大。相對而言，「聖火／國旗」事件，將以台灣本土台北市的開放空間為事件現場，倘竟禁止出現國旗，又命沿路公私機構降旗，必將形成北京當局與台灣民眾的直接角力，對台灣社會的心理衝擊將不堪設想。北京當局若有聖火沿途禁旗主張，不啻是與全體台灣民眾為敵，藍綠皆然。

如今，「聖火／國旗」事件將如何演化尚未明朗，馬英九及謝長廷卻皆已表態將持國旗迎聖火；而馬英九更宣示「旗歌五原則」，主張今後應將「賽事」與「觀眾」區隔，不能剝奪觀眾持國旗、唱國歌的權利。如此一來「聖火／國旗」之事猶不知如何發展，未來比賽現場觀眾席上的旗歌爭議卻已可預料將層出迭見。這是「聖火／國旗」事件引發的反彈，無可回逆。

台海情勢丕變，由於民進黨取得執政地位，如今「中華民國」與「台獨」的分際，其實只剩下一紙之隔的「正名制憲」四字而已。倘若中華民國的國旗仍能每日升上總統府及所有政府機構的旗桿，中華民國的「現狀」即差堪維持；而若北京當局竟欲在聖火沿途禁止國旗出現，其立即效應必是對「現狀」的重大衝擊，亦是為台獨改變現狀的訴求火上加油。準此以言，北京當局應知：中華民國及青天白日旗皆為維持現狀的重要支柱！

台灣如今的政治主題儼然已是：中華民國與台灣國，何者才是台灣的出路？因此，北京當局的台海政策，亦必須在中華民國與台灣國之間作一抉擇。倘若一方面「反對改變現狀」，另一方面又禁止聖火沿途出現國旗，則「現狀」既難維持，兩岸的困局也就必然更趨嚴峻。