Pragmatism and Win/Win Thinking: the New Theme of Cross-Strait

Pragmatism and Win/Win Thinking: the New Theme of Cross-Strait Relations
China Times Editorial
A Translation
April 14, 2008

When future historians write the history of cross-strait relations, what will they make of the Siew Hu Meeting at this year's Boao Forum? Will they see it as an ice-breaker following the big freeze that began in 2000? Will they see it as historic? As the highest level meeting between the two sides since 1949? Regardless of how they see it, one point is indisputable. The meeting is a turning point in cross-strait relations. It has changed the course of history.

Perhaps it was the timing. Perhaps it was historical inevitability. No cross-strait summit was in the cards. Yet on the eve of the KMT's return to power, it became a reality. The Boao Forum was originally a trade forum. Its primary function was to serve as a transnational networking platform.

Those invited were mostly economic and financial officials from various nations. The forum enjoyed a diversified and flexible public/private, bilateral/multilateral, political/economic status highly conducive to informal cross-strait dialogue. Siew is one of the VIPs who has been invited to every session. The only difference is that this year he will be sworn in as Vice President of the Republic of China a month from now. At the moment however, he remains a civilian. The timing has made it possible to avoid disputes over his official status. The two sides need no longer remain preoccupied with official identity and political status. All that needed to build goodwill now is a protocol for future interaction. The forum has established an atmosphere conducive to rapprochement. Who can deny that the "Siew Hu Meeting" is not the sequel to the Koo-Wang talks? That it constitutes another milestone in cross-strait historical development?

As we review cross-strait relations, we see how much time was wasted jockeying for position and quibbling over irrelevancies such as One China vs. Different Interpretations, cross-strait vs. two states, dialogue vs. negotiations, consensus vs. spirit, premise vs. topic. Who knows how much energy has been expended on these semantic issues alone? The result has been years of deadlock. The two sides are as far apart as ever. Nobody has convinced anybody. Nobody has taken advantage of anybody. This jockeying for position has solved nothing. At the Boao Forum, such issues were shelved. Everyone knew they existed, but nobody spoke of them.

What alternative do we have? The cross-strait status quo is the result of historical circumstances. The two sides are each subject to their own internal constraints. If every controversy must be resolved before we can take the next step, we will merely perpetuate the current stalemate. The wheels of history never cease turning. If a wide range of non-controversial issues can be resolved, via a win/win scenario, why cling stubbornly to one's entrenched position? Vincent Siew and Ma Ying-jeou have conveyed a message to the mainland: "Face reality squarely, create future opportunities, set aside disputes, and seeking win/win solutions." That just about says it all.

The language of the Siew Hu Meeting reflects a whole new mode of cross-strait interaction. The two sides no longer need to quibble endlessly over pointless semantic distinctions. They are now free to take effective action. Vincent Siew Hu shared his "Four Hopes" with Hu Jintao. He hoped for direct, cross-strait transportation links, mainland tourism to Taiwan, economic and trade normalization, and the resumption of consultations and negotiations. Hu Jintao responded clearly with his "Four Constants." Together they addressed pragmatic issues and narrowed the focus. As long as these hopes and constants prevail, even more substantive talks will follow.

Siew proposed "pursuing a win-win situation." Hu Jintao, in response, proposed "creating a win-win situation." This footnote to the summit gives us cause for optimism. The two sides have entered a new era of pragmatism. During the second half of this year various technical issues can be worked out. This pragmatism will become the dominant theme in cross-strait interaction for the next few years. As a result, we can anticipate creative breakthroughs to more difficult problems, such as membership in the WHA and APEC. The next stage will be a form of benign cross-strait interaction. It will also be a kind of a test.

The Wang-Koo Era is long past. The eight year long rhetorical stand-off will end one month from now. So will economic stagnation and political stalemate. The mainland has appointed Director Chen Yunlin of the State Council for Taiwan Affairs, an old hand at cross-strait affairs, as the next Chairman of the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS). On May 20, Taiwan will appoint new personnel to the Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF). When the two organizations resume cross-strait dialogue, they will usher in a new era of cross-strait relations.

讓務實與雙贏重回兩岸思維的主軸
中國時報
2008.04.14　

嘗試預想一下，未來史家在書寫兩岸關係史之際，會怎樣評價這回博鰲論壇的「蕭胡會」？認為它是兩岸自二○○○年陷入低迷僵持後的一場「融冰會晤」，亦或是兩岸自一九四九年以來最高層級的「歷史性會晤」？不論評論視角的落點在哪裡，有一點應該是不會有分歧的：即這場會晤將是一個歷史轉捩點，接下來兩岸關係的歷史進程，確定會有完全不一樣的篇章了。

是時機巧合也好，是歷史機緣也罷，原本根本不會是排在近程階段的「兩岸高層會晤」，竟然就在國民黨重回執政的前夕，先行戲劇性地促成了。博鰲論壇原本是一個以經貿對話為主軸的跨國聯誼性平台，受邀者多為各國政經領袖，它在運作上享有的游走於官方與民間、雙邊與多邊、政治與經濟的多樣彈性，相當有利於此刻的兩岸進行非正式對話，而蕭萬長又是每屆都受邀出席的貴賓之一，這屆唯一不同的是，一個月後他將宣誓就職為中華民國的副總統，但此刻他依舊還維持著平民的身分，這種時間與身分的些微落差，讓兩岸現存的所有惱人爭議，都被巧妙地迴避掉了。雙方暫時都不必再在身分與定位上去「機關算盡」，只須在「互動規格」上去累積善意即可。不談別的，僅就營造氛圍而言，誰說這場會面，不是繼辜汪會談後，另一次兩岸重要的歷史進程呢？

回顧過往的兩岸關係，有大半歲月都是放著實質問題不解決，一路虛耗在「定位」的爭執上，例如到底是「一中」還是「各表」？是「兩岸」還是「兩國」？是「對話」還是「談判」？是「對等」還是「平等」？是「共識」還是「精神」？是「前提」還是「議題」？光是這些語言表述的形式，就不知已耗掉多少人的心力智慧，結果爭議了多年，依舊是兩道平行線，誰也沒說服誰，誰也沒占到誰的便宜，一直到今天這些累積出來的「定位」糾葛，其實一樁都沒有獲得解決。在這場博鰲論壇中，與其說它們都被擱置，還不如說讓一切都暫且「存而不論」吧！

畢竟不這麼做，還能有什麼更好的途徑呢？兩岸現狀是歷史所造成的，兩岸內部也都各自存有不同的結構制約，如果一切都要先等「爭議」達成共識後才能繼續走下一步，那麼恐怕也只有維持「僵持」一個選擇。但時代的巨輪畢竟是朝前運轉的，如果兩岸間的許多「非爭議領域」可以透過實質互惠達成雙贏，何苦還要死守在無解的定位爭議裡虛耗？從這一點看馬英九透過蕭萬長向大陸所傳達「正視現實、開創未來、擱置爭議、追求雙贏」的十六字箴言，不正是道盡了一切？

檢視這場蕭胡會所使用的語言，也充分呈現了與以往兩岸互動完全不同的風貌。雙方都不再執著於尚有爭議的「名詞」上咬文嚼字或各顯機鋒，也不再在無謂的「形容詞」上高來高去，而是多了積極正面的「動詞」，蕭萬長當著胡錦濤的面提出兩岸直航、陸客來台觀光、經貿正常化、恢復協商談判「四個希望」，而胡錦濤也以「四個繼續」明確加以回應，不僅鎖定的都是實質問題，而且也達到聚焦的效果，只要這些「希望」能夠「繼續」下去，後續更實質層級的商談，馬上就可以啟動了。

如果說，蕭萬長所揭示的「追求雙贏」，與胡錦濤所回應的「共創雙贏」，可以做為這次蕭胡高峰會的一個註腳，那麼或許我們可以在此樂觀的預期：一個兩岸邁入「務實」的年代，即將在今年下半年陸續開展，圍繞於功能性、技術性議題的協商，將成為主導今後幾年兩岸互動的主要議程。而同樣較為棘手的ＷＨＡ年會、ＡＰＥＣ年會等議程屆時有無更富創意的突破，對兩岸下一階段的良性互動，也將會是一項考驗。

無論如何，辜汪兩老把酒言歡的年代已遠，過去八年的言辭對立、僵持停滯歲月，亦將在一個月後譜上休止符。如今大陸將由嫻熟兩岸事務的國台辦主任陳雲林接任海協會會長，台灣在五二○之後亦可望有一個全新的海基會人事布局，當兩岸兩會開始重啟對話，也等於就預告一個與以往不一樣的「兩岸關係」，即將登場。