Triumph of the Will: Chen Shui-bian's "Rule by Confrontation"

Triumph of the Will: Chen Shui-bian's "Rule by Confrontation"
United Daily New editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 23, 2007

Apparently the strong suit of the eight-year old Chen Shui-bian regime is its ability to say: "You want to make something of it?"

Chen Shui-bian, ignoring the fact that he failed to file an application for a road use permit, insisted on running the first stage of the "Join the UN Torch Relay." By doing so, he trampled over the rule of law and further undermined the questionable legitimacy of the "Join the UN" campaign. The tempest over the road use permit is being referred to as an "incident." It would be more accurate to characterize it as a confrontation. The Chen regime habitually resorts to confrontation to get what it wants. This reveals that Chen Shui-bian's goal is not to "Join the UN," but to exploit the political impact of the confrontation itself. Universal chaos means political opportunities.

The road use permit was purely a procedural issue. It has now been turned into a test of strength between central authorities and local authorities, into a contest of wills between a president and a mayor. The problem is not with the Taipei Municipal Government, but with an arrogant event sponsor. The event sponsor intentionally created a situation in which the president would take the lead in breaking the law. The "Join the UN Torch Relay" is a public activity in which a head of state and scores of political appointees intend to participate. Yet the Sports Affairs Council never had any intention of applying for a road use permit. It considered the general public's right to use the roads a non-issue. Chen Shui-bian dared Hao Lung-pin to "Come and get me, if you have the guts!" In his eyes there was no rule of law. It did not exist. His only concern was creating chaos and escalating confrontation.

Whether a government is able to operate smoothly is determined a three levels: At the lowest level is the civil service, its administrative neutrality and its adherence to the rule of law. At the intermediate level are political appointees, their policy-making ability and their administrative style. At the highest level is the ruling administration and its vision for the nation. Since regime change seven and a half years ago, the government's ability to make policy has steadily deteriorated, starting from the top down. The leadership's irresolution, corruption, and incompetence have become Taiwan greatest liability. Mid-level decision-makers have lost the capacity to arrive at independent judgments. Today, even low-level agencies's adherence to the rule of law has been obliterated by the chief executive. How can such a government carry out even its most basic functions?

The sponsors of the "Join the UN Torch Relay" missed the one month filing deadline for a "sporting event." Why not make up for it by changing the application to read "political event?" It would be more honest. The sponsors could coordinate with the Taipei Municipal Government, requesing an emergency dispensation. That would be the normal procedure for a normal government. But the Chen regime taunted local authorities for two straight days, daring them to "Come and get me, if you have the guts!" Chen Shui-bian puts himself above the law and abuses the powers of his office when he engages in such provocations. This is why the ROC is no longer a "normal nation."

The Chen regime's love of confrontation has its roots. When the Democratic Progressive Party was out of office, it provoked endless street corner confrontations to undermine Kuomintang authority. Once it seized power, it used demostrations and provocations against the Chinese Communist Party to gain an edge at the polls. The strategic value of such confrontations is understandable. But Chen Shui-bian is provoking confrontations not merely between people, but also between north and south, and the government itself. It is provoking confrontations between different agencies within the executive, making it impossible for law enforcement and administrative personnel to fulfill their duties. To rule a nation in this manner is selfish, myopic, and callous beyond belief.

Nor is Chen Shui-bian alone. More and more officials have adopted confrontation as a means of dealing with government affairs. For example, Government Information Office Chief Hsieh Chi-wei's recent theatrics in the Legislative Yuan. For example, Minister of Education Tu Cheng-sheng's glowering responses to outside criticisms. Not forgetting of course Ye Kuo-hsing, who "shot" and executed members of the media with his thumb and forefinger, or Yao Wen-chi, who provoked one controversy after another. These reflect a government and civil service out of control and oblivious about its mission. Rule by Whim has replaced Rule by Law. What kind of face should we associate with such a government? How about the face of a petty tyrant barking out commands? How about a bunch of harlequins leaping about in an effort to steal the spotlight, while conscientious officials look on in silence?

The Democratic Progressive Party is aware of the need for order. But it has chosen to engage in an orgy of mayhem, then to feast on the blood gushing from the nation's wounds. For over seven years, it has shouted slogans promising "reconciliation, harmony, happiness, and joy," not one of which has materialized. It relentlessly leads the people down the road toward confrontation, animosity, and misery.

What kind of language is "Come and get me, if you have the guts!" but the language of a Mafia capo? Yet it emerges from the mouth of our head of state, a man who was once a prominent lawyer and legislator. This man, the "Son of Taiwan" responsible for regime change, is now the same man who has destroyed the island's budding democracy and fragile rule of law. Chen Shui-bian's contorted visage reflects both the ruling party's rapid decay and Taiwan's collective unwillingness to look itself in the mirror.

Chen Shui-bian's eight year long "rule by confrontation" has drained Taiwan of its lifeblood and vitality. Now Chen would have everyone believe that an illegal, unsanctioned "Join the UN Torch Relay" will somehow overthrow the Republic of China and establish a "Nation of Taiwan?"

依「膽」行政：陳水扁的「衝突治國術」
【聯合報╱社論】
2007.10.23 03:56 am

陳水扁八年治國的看家本領就是：嘸你嘜安吶？

罔顧未合法取得路權，陳水扁執意持第一棒率「入聯路跑」開跑，這不僅踐踏了國家法治，更玷汙整個入聯活動。路權風波與其稱為一個「事件」，倒不如說是扁政府慣用的「衝突模式」，企圖藉著製造衝突和爭端來營造效果。這也顯示，陳水扁追求的不是入聯，而是它的政爭效應。天下大亂，形勢大好。

路權原是一個單純的「程序」問題，現在竟能升級為中央對地方、總統對市長的角力，關鍵不在北市府強硬，而在主辦單位傲慢自恃，從而故意造成「總統帶頭違法」的態勢。一個國家元首及眾多政務官參與的公開活動，體委會自始即無意申請路權，那是根本不把民眾的用路權放在眼裡；而當陳水扁向郝龍斌嗆聲「有膽來抓」時，他的眼裡根本沒有法治，只想製造這種「無政府狀態」來升高衝突。

政府的運作順暢與否，取決於三個層次：在最基礎的部分，是文官體系的「行政中立」及「依法行政」；在中間一層，是政務官員的決策智慧及從政風格；在最上一層，則是主政者的治國瞻矚。政黨輪替七年半來，政府的決策力由上而下逐漸腐蝕，領導階層的善變反覆及貪瀆無能，成為台灣最大的危機；在中間的政務決策層次，則陷入失去人格風骨及自主判斷的茫然；如今，竟連基層機構「依法行政」的準則都遭元首踐踏，這個政府還能維持基本的功能嗎？

試想，入聯活動錯過以「體育活動」名義在一個月前申請的期限，何妨改以「政治活動」補辦，也更名副其實；甚至，也可透過行政協調，要求北市府緊急協助，這才是正常政府的運作方式。但扁政府的作法，卻接連兩天由總統放話威嚇「有膽來抓」，這種挑釁的手法，不僅把自己放在一個超越法律的地位，甚至是刻意利用元首身分製造衝突，把「依法行政」的基本信仰全盤瓦解。台灣之所以不是一個「正常國家」，真正的根源其實在此。

扁政府對於「衝突模式」之愛好，其來有自。民進黨在野時期，透過不斷的街頭衝撞，有效瓦解國民黨的統治權威；執政後，又利用對中共的示威挑釁，賺取選舉的邊緣利益。上述衝突操作不乏戰略需要，倒可理解；但演至今天，陳水扁不僅在人民之間製造衝突，在南北製造衝突，甚至在政府內部製造衝突，讓不同的行政機構互相對立，讓執法及行政人員無所適從。這樣的治國方式，何止自私短視，簡直是冷血不仁。

不僅陳水扁如此，政府部門也越來越多官員採取「衝突模式」來處理政務。諸如新聞局長謝志偉在立法院的越位演出，教育部長杜正勝對外界批評的橫眉怒目應答，更別忘了先前「掃射」媒體的葉國興，屢滋爭議的姚文智，都反映了整個政府體系的傾斜與文官自我認知的失控。且看，當「依法行政」的邏輯被「依膽行政」取代後，政府的面貌變成了什麼模樣？一個獨夫隻手號令天下，幾個跳梁小丑搶盡舞台風光，絕大多數官員噤若寒蟬，現在不就是這般景象嗎？

民進黨並非不知道「秩序」為何物，它卻讓自己耽溺在以「破壞秩序」與「破壞和諧」為職志的癖好中，以舔吮社會的創傷和國家的血痕為樂。七年多了，喊過最多的「和解」、「和諧」、「幸福」、「快樂」的口號，無一能夠實現，卻不斷把人民帶入對峙、仇恨和哀傷。

「有膽來抓」，其實是黑幫大哥向司法嗆聲的語言，卻出自我們國家元首之口，他還曾是狀元律師、第一名的立法委員、首位締造政黨輪替的「台灣之子」，他卻也一手葬送了台灣的民主和法治。陳水扁的扭曲變形，反射的不僅是執政黨的快速墮落，也是台灣不敢攬鏡自照的沉淪。

陳水扁的「衝突治國術」內耗空轉了台灣八年的元氣，如今他卻要大家相信，跑一場未經合法手續的入聯接力，「中華民國的供桌」即可拆掉，台灣就可以得救了！