Chairman Yu is gone, but is Candidate Hsieh back?

Chairman Yu is gone, but is Candidate Hsieh back?
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 03, 2007

When future historians write the history of the Democratic Progressive Party, they may not know where to begin. Take the events of late September for example. On September 28, the eve of the DPP's Anniversary Celebration, the party chairman suddenly resigned. For the first time in its history, the party celebrated an anniversary without a party chairman. Next, on September 30, during the DPP's National Congress, Chen Shui-bian, the DPP's own sitting president, failed to show up. Finally, to top things off, Frank Hsieh, the party's own presidential candidate, sent word he had "worried himself sick" and would also be absent. The party had planned to give its nominee for president in 2008 a thunderous rally. Instead, because a party chairman was forced to submit his resignation over his vigorously promoted "Resolution for a Normal Nation," the curtain unceremoniously rang down on an anti-climactic debacle.

Apparently none of the DPP's Green Princes have been happy of late. The Chen Faction controls the overall situation, but certain developments have exceeded even his ability to control them. If circumstances force Chen to resume the DPP's party chairmanship, he will have to shoulder total responsibility for victory or defeat in the upcoming legislative and presidential elections. Annette Lu and Su Tseng-chang have not been in the spotlight for quite some time. Frank Hsieh and Yu Hsi-kuen find themselves in equally awkward predicaments. Yu aggressively promoted his "Resolution for a Normal Nation." During the Party Congress he was subjected to a humiliating vote of non confidence. Afterwards he had to endure mealy-mouthed lip service calling for his retention as chairman.

Hsieh's predicament is equally awkward. It is already October. Yet the party hierarchy has still been unable to create a consensus around their new leader. The Party Congress was supposed to consolidate support for Hsieh. Instead, bickering over a paper resolution blurred the focus of the event. The result was Hsieh, the star of the show, got upstaged by a supporting character. It's no wonder he "worried himself sick."

Hsieh is a mild mannered individual. For him to blurt out that "Government policy may be Chen's responsibility, but campaign policy is mine" shows he is no longer willing to suffer in silence, no longer willing to tolerate his increasing marginalization. Since his nomination as the party's presidential candidate, Hsieh has attempted to smooth over any ruffled feathers from the party primaries. He has purposely adopted a low profile. Unfortunately as matters stand, besides being a "presidential candidate," Frank Hsieh is a non-entitity. He lacks access to either party or government resources. Nor would he know where to acquire such resources. His running mate was forced upon him. Even control over the theme of his election campaign has fallen into his rival's hands. Over the past several months, A Bian has spearheaded his "Plebiscite to Join the UN." Yu Hsi-kuen has aggressively promoted his "Resolution for a Normal Nation." Spun positively, one could say they were endeavoring to establish a theme for the presidential election. Spun negatively, one could say the Green Princes were fighting over access to the bully pulpit. The result of the "Plebiscite to Join the UN," the "Rectification of Taiwan's Name," and the "Rectification of the Name of the Nation" was that Frank Hsieh virtually vanished from the political stage. It was as if he was the only one in the entire party concerned about his election prospects. No wonder he felt compelled to call in sick in protest.

By the same token, Yu Hsi-kuen also feels put upon. His "Resolution for a Normal Nation" merely parroted A Bian's own proposal. Why was A Bian's "Plebiscite to Join the UN" equated with "loving Taiwan?" Why did Yu's "Resolution for a Normal Nation" lead to Yu being vilified as an "Enemy of the People" who "undermined party solidarity?" Yu Hsi-kuen has never done anything but follow loyally in A Bian's footsteps. How did he wind up as a fall guy for Chen and Hsieh to gang up on and wipe the floor with? "Put upon" doesn't begin to describe how Yu must feel.

The contradiction between Hsieh and Yu reflects the DPP's dilemma. What are the "Rectification of Taiwan's Name" and the "Plebiscite to Join the UN?" Are they sacred ends? Or are they merely means to an end? Are they real issues, or phony issues? The answer is now clear: Even if the establishment of a "normal nation" is a sacred end, it cannot be allowed to negatively impact Frank Hsieh's election victory. In other words, even if President Chen's "Plebiscite to Join the UN" arouses concerns in Washington and Beijing, the bottom line is its impact on domestic politics. If crossing the line were to negatively affect the election, that would be another matter. Yu Hsi-kuen's problem is that somewhere along the way his obvious charade turned real. That was a no-no. Ye Chu-lan and Chiu Yi-jen's comments at the National Congress were uncommonly pragmatic, something seldom encountered in the DPP's political rhetoric.

The curtain has fallen on the DPP National Congress. The "Rectification of the Name of the Nation" and the "Rectification of Taiwan's Name" no longer matter. Yu Hsi-kuen quietly ended the DPP's "Chairman Yu Era" with a vanishing act. Frank Hsieh drew attention to himself by "worrying himself sick." But will a DPP no longer under Yu's chairmanship really care whether Frank Hsieh is in charge of his own election campaign? If President Chen decides to resume the party chairmanship, if "Chairman Chen" insists on pushing his "Plebiscite to Join the UN," if he insists that Hsieh's election campaign must defy reality, no matter what the cost, then not only will Chen be in charge of the government, he will also be in charge of Hsieh's election campaign. When all is said and done, Hsieh will not be in charge of his own campaign, Chen will, and Hsieh will have "worried himself sick" for nothing.

Courtesy China Times

中國時報 　2007.10.03
走了游主席，選舉就能重回謝的掌握？
中時社論

　對未來撰寫民進黨黨史的史家而言，今年的九月底或許會是很難下筆的一頁篇章。先是九二八黨慶前夕黨主席突然請辭，首度度過了一個沒有黨主席的黨慶，接下來九三○黨全代會，不僅黨主席繼續「行蹤成謎」，現任總統也缺席，總統候選人也因「憂憤成疾」不克出席。讓原本規畫是要給總統候選人造勢的一場盛會，卻為了一紙已請辭黨主席在幕後強推的「正常國家決議文」，弄得陣腳大亂進而草草落幕。

　看得出來，這幾天所有的綠天王都很不快樂！扁一路掌控全局，但局面似有超出他所能掌控的趨勢，一旦情勢逼著他必須回鍋黨主席，也等於預告未來立委與總統大選的勝負責任都要他一肩挑了。呂蘇兩人早就不是聚光燈的焦點，謝游兩人的處境則是同樣難堪。游自己親上火線強推的「正常國家決議文」，在全代會中以近乎被羞辱的壓倒性多數遭否決，卻還得面對各方狀似誠意的「慰留」。

　謝的處境也同樣難堪，時序都已邁入十月了，黨內迄今都還凝聚不出「新共主」的氣勢，一場該是環繞他造勢的全代會，卻為一紙決議文的文字糾葛，將焦點完全模糊，結果該是他擔綱主角的造勢舞台，戲份竟全被跑龍套的配角給搶了去，試問他怎麼不會「憂憤成疾」。

　以謝的溫和個性，會說出「國政扁做主，選舉照我的」這般的重話，顯示他已不願再隱藏自己的焦慮，也對他的日趨邊緣化的處境益發顯得不耐。從取得總統候選人資格以來，為了平撫初選的恩怨，謝的身段已經刻意壓低，但情勢的發展卻是謝長廷除了擁有「候選人」的身分外，簡直什麼也不是。黨政資源他既沾不了也無從置喙，副手是別人替他「撮合」的，甚至競選主軸的掌控都瀕臨失守。過去幾個月，前有阿扁主導的「入聯公投」，後有游錫？力推的「正常國家決議文」，說好聽是要協助為大選定主軸，說難聽點就是眾天王爭搶發言位置，結果一陣「公投入聯」、「台灣正名」、「國號正名」下來，謝長廷的身影幾近乎消失，全黨上下彷彿只有他最關心大選選情，最後怎麼不會落得必須以稱病缺席來抗議。

　同樣的，游錫?何嘗不覺委屈呢？他所推動的「正常國家決議文」，不正是在落實扁的主張嗎？怎麼扁推「公投入聯」就是愛台灣，換做他推「正常國家決議文」，就變成是破壞團結的「全黨公敵」？游錫?一路追隨扁的步伐，結局卻是淪為扁謝合作一塊「清理戰場」的對象，豈僅是一句「難堪」所能道盡？

　謝游的之間的矛盾，某種程度所反映的正是民進黨的困境。說到底，「正名」也好、「入聯」也罷，究竟是個神聖的「目的」？還只是打選戰的「手段」？換個說法問，它究竟是真議題還是假議題？現在答案終於揭曉了：即就算建立「正常國家」是再神聖不過的目標，也不能影響到謝長廷的最終勝選。換言之，就算陳總統操縱「公投入聯」議題如何引發華府與北京的嚴重關切，最終還是要回到國內選舉的動員效應上，如果這種操作跨過了某些「紅線」，導致選舉會受到影響，那又是另一回事了。所以游錫?真正的問題是，明明從頭到尾演的就是齣「假戲」，他竟然想「真作」起來了，這當然就犯忌諱了。看看葉菊蘭與邱義仁在全代會中的發言，那種罕見的「務實」風格，反而是我們在民進黨中很難看到的政治語言。

　民進黨全代會落幕了。「國號正名」也好，「台灣正名」也罷，現在都已經不重要了。游錫?藉由他的「行蹤成謎」，悄悄地結束了民進黨的「游主席」時代。而謝長廷則是透過「憂憤成疾」的暗示，重新召喚大家注意他處境。只不過，一個不再有「游主席」的民進黨，是否就意味今後謝的選舉能夠真正「照我的」？如果陳總統決定回鍋黨主席，如果這位「陳主席」依舊堅持「入聯公投」的操作最重要，也依舊對怎麼打這場選舉自認「當仁不讓」，那麼不僅國政扁做主，選舉也一樣扁做主，最後這場選舉還是不會讓謝「照我來」，而是一切「照扁來」，那麼謝的「憂憤成疾」，怕還是會白忙一場！