Will the Chen vs. Hsieh Struggle kill the Plebiscite to Join the UN?

Will the Chen vs. Hsieh Struggle kill the Plebiscite to Join the UN?
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 19, 2007

Chen Shui-bian and Frank Hsieh have divided the 2008 presidential election into two parts. One is the economy. The other is the Plebiscite to Join the UN. They have equated reviving the economy with the feeding of domestic animals. Frank Hsieh referred to it contemptuously as the feeding of "pigs, dogs, and chickens." They would have us believe that only demagoguing the Plebiscite to Join the UN can uphold the "national honor."

Chen Shui-bian went so far as to say that, "Just because you revive the economy, doesn't mean you will win the election." What he meant was the Plebiscite to Join the UN must trump all economic issues, and will be the DPP's strategy for winning the election.

Chen Shui-bian wants to use the Plebiscite to Join the UN to spark a war over reunification vs. independence. He wants a war over reunification vs. independence to eclipse economic issues. Because in order to stress economic issues, he must improve cross-Straits relations. But improving cross-Straits relations requires undermining the war over reunification vs. independence. Since Chen Shui-bian has already decided that the Plebiscite to Join the UN is going to be the primary issue in the war over reunification vs. independence, he has no choice but to belittle economic issues. He is belittling economic issues because he is unwilling to acknowledge that improving cross-Straits relations is a necessary prerequisite to improving the economy. In other words championing Taiwan independence necessitates clinging to the Taiwan independence Economic Doctrine. Within Chen Shui-bian's strategic framework, reviving the economy and promoting a Plebiscite to Join the UN are either/or propositions.

Once the euphoria of the Plebiscite to Join the UN Torch Relay died down, the defects in Chen Shui-bian's phony dichotomy became apparent. The public soon realized that promoting a Plebiscite to Join the UN could not be simplistically equated with defending the national honor. All it did was rub salt in one's own wounds. All it did was embarrass the Republic of China by underscoring its diplomatic dilemma. All it did was sell people a bill of goods, a Never Never Land called the "Nation of Taiwan." On the one hand it demeaned the Republic of China. On the other hand it failed to establish a Nation of Taiwan. How can this sort of self-demeaning election rhetoric and politically divisive election strategy uphold the "national honor?"

Besides, what is Chen saying? Is he saying that since reviving the economy doesn't mean you will win the election, therefore failing to revive the economy means you will win the election? Is he asking Frank Hsieh to admit that even if he wins the election, he won't be able to revive the economy? Chen and Hsieh are intentionally and maliciously belittling economic concerns by equating such concerns with the feeding of domestic animals. But for ordinary people, "national honor" is the consequence of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If individual citizens are deprived of these rights, how much "national honor" are they going to feel?

To summarize Chen and Hsieh's current situation: First, the people find themselves in dire economic straits. The ruling DPP has deprived people of their dignity. Second, after careful consideration, they have discovered that promoting the Plebiscite to Join the UN simply cannot be equated with upholding the national honor. All it can do is wound the Republic of China's national honor, and sell the public a bill of goods, a fictitious "Nation of Taiwan." In short, the people are deprived of dignity in their impoverished state, and the Plebiscite to Join the UN is destroying any remnants of "national honor."

Frank Hsieh has been abducted. His campaign has been hijacked. The Democratic Progressive Party's Resolution for a Normal Nation compels him to implement the Prompt Rectification of Names & Authoring of a New Constitution, and commits him to the Doctrine of Perpetual Taiwan independence. The war over reunification vs. independence provoked by the Plebiscite to Join the UN compels him to run for election of the president of the Nation of Taiwan. As a result, Frank Hsieh has advanced his incomprehensible "pigs, dogs, and chickens" economic theory. He has caved in to Chen Shui-bian's election strategy. That strategy maintains that reviving the economy somehow sacrifices the national honor, but demagoguing the "Join the UN" campaign upholds the national honor.

But Frank Hsieh recently did an about face. He said that "without Deep Green support, Chen Shui-bian wouldn't have any support at all." He said "if Chen Shui-bian kept it up, Taiwan would wind up with nothing." He said "How does destroying Taiwan's competitiveness constitute love for Taiwan?" He declared that he would "pardon Taiwan businessmen" for the mortal sin of investing in mainland China. He declared that Taiwan "cannot afford to give up the [mainland] Chinese market." Frank Hsieh's positions on these issues have drawn a line in the sand between himself and Chen Shui-bian's Taiwan Independence Economic Doctrine. He has turned back in the direction of policies he himself denounced only a few months ago as Pro Reunification Economics.

Frank Hsieh's dilemma is taking shape. Frank Hsieh now advocates what he himself denounced as Pro Reunification Economics. How will he deal with the Resolution for a Normal Nation and the Doctrine of Perpetual Taiwan independence? How will he complete the Rectification of Names and the Authoring of a New Constitution within five years? How will he account for his failure to promote the Plebiscite to Join the UN and defend the "national honor?" How will he remove the albatross around his neck known as Chen Shui-bian?

We have repeatedly pointed out that championing a Taiwan Independence Policy requires one to implement a Taiwan Independence Economic Doctrine. Championing a Non-Taiwan Independence Policy requires one to implement a Non-Taiwan Independence Economic Doctrine. Frank Hsieh, who advocates Taiwan independence, has switched back to what he himself denounced as Pro Reunification Economics. He has drawn a line in the sand between himself and the Resolution for a Normal Nation, the Plebiscite to Join the UN, and the albatross around his neck known as Chen Shui-bian. Apparently everything depends on the ability to talk a good game after all.

The Chen vs. Hsieh struggle is heating up. Is the Plebiscite to Join the UN trial balloon losing air? Will it gradually shrivel up in the wind?

扁謝鬥爭將使「入聯公投」消風洩氣？
【聯合報╱社論】
2007.11.19 02:15 am

陳水扁與謝長廷一度以二分法將大選議題切成兩塊。一塊是經濟，一塊是入聯公投。經濟被他們認為是等而下之的豬狗雞議題，唯有操作入聯公投，始能維護「國格尊嚴」。

陳水扁甚至說，「經濟搞好，也不一定選得上」；言下之意，就是要將「入聯公投議題」凌駕、壓制「經濟議題」，並以此一「選戰策略」贏得大選。

陳 水扁欲以「入聯公投」帶動「統獨鬥爭」。既欲帶動「統獨鬥爭」，即必須壓制貶抑「經濟議題」。因為，倘要強調「經濟議題」，毫無疑問地必須以改善兩岸關係 為前提；但若要改善兩岸關係，「統獨鬥爭」即告動搖。因此，陳水扁既要以「入聯公投」的統獨鬥爭為選戰主軸，即無可選擇地必須貶抑經濟議題；而其貶抑「經 濟議題」，只因不願承認勢須改善兩岸關係的必要前提。也就是說，主張「台獨路線」，即必須堅持「台獨經濟」。於是，在陳水扁二分法的戰略架構中，「拚經 濟」與「入聯公投」遂成矛盾對立之勢。

在「入聯公投」聖火接力的高潮過後，陳水扁的「只拚經濟無尊嚴／專搞入聯有尊嚴」的二分法已漸露破 綻。因為，國人已漸發現，「入聯公投」與「國格尊嚴」之間，根本不能畫上等號。「入聯公投」的操作手法，完全不在追求「國格尊嚴」；反而是在傷口撒鹽，羞 辱「中華民國」的外交困境，並買空賣空地推銷「台灣國」的幻境。一方面醜化中華民國，但另一方面又不能建立台灣國。這種自貶國格的「選舉語言」，與撕裂國 家的「選戰策略」，如何能夠建立「國格尊嚴」？

何況，若謂「經濟搞好，也不一定選得上」，則難道「經濟搞壞，就選得上」，或要謝長廷承認 「選上，也搞不好經濟」？扁謝故意並惡意地將「經濟」貶抑為等而下之的畜生議題，但在一般人民的生活經驗中，「國格尊嚴」的基礎在民生樂利，民生經濟若無 「尊嚴」，尚有何「國格尊嚴」可言？

扁謝走到今日地步，總結戰果：一、民生經濟窘困，不能給人民足夠的光榮與「尊嚴」；二、仔細思量，又 發現「入聯公投」根本不是要提升「國格尊嚴」，而只是要毀傷中華民國的「尊嚴」，並買空賣地推銷台灣國這個「假國家」。總之，民生經濟無「尊嚴」，入聯公 投也是在摧毀「國格尊嚴」。

謝長廷陷於重重的挾持與綁架中。民進黨的《正常國家決議文》，命令他必須執行「早日正名制憲」的「不斷台獨 論」；「入聯公投」的統獨鬥爭，也逼他表態「選台灣國的總統」。於是，謝長廷稍早終於匪夷所思地提出了一套「豬狗雞畜生經濟論」，全面倒向陳水扁「拚經濟 無尊嚴／搞入聯有尊嚴」的大選戰略。

但是，謝長廷最近突然變臉。既說陳水扁「沒有深綠支持，就無人支持」，又說「陳水扁這樣管下去，台灣 會一無所有」、「害台灣沒競爭力，怎是愛台灣」；並宣布「大赦台商」等政見，又宣示「不能放棄中國市場」。謝長廷的這些主張，已經完全脫離了陳水扁的「獨 派經濟」，而竟然轉向了謝長廷自己在幾個月前親口所痛斥的「統派經濟」。

謝長廷的困局正在形成之中。謝長廷現在改為主張他自己所謂的「統派經濟」，則《正常國家決議文》的「不斷台獨論」如何處理？他自己宣示的「五年正名制憲論」如何實踐？「入聯公投」所渲染的「國格尊嚴」如何交代？陳水扁的「許純美效應」又如何化解？

我 們曾一再指出：主張「台獨政策」，即必須貫徹「台獨經濟」；若採取「非台獨政策」，則必須推動「非台獨經濟」。如今，主張台獨的謝長廷竟轉向了他自己所稱 的「統派經濟」，即勢須與《正常國家決議文》、「入聯公投」及「陳純美水扁先生」全面劃清界線。畢竟，這不能只靠一張嘴。

扁謝鬥爭正在升溫，難道入聯公投的氣球已被戳破，漸將消風洩氣？