Humanitarianism and Humanism

Humanitarianism and Humanism:
A Major Earthquake turns into an Opportunity for Dialogue
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
May 16, 2008

The outgoing DPP government has announced that it will raise two billion NT in disaster relief for victims of the Sichuan Earthquake, to be followed by another 700 million NT. Civil servants will donate one day's wages, funds will be raised from the community, and humanitarian charter flights will take off immediately.

This has provoked controversy. Those who object ask, "Why should we contribute to [mainland] China, when it is aiming its missiles at Taiwan?" Or, "Why didn't we contribute the same amount to Myanmar?" Or, "Why propose such an extravagant project five days before you step down?" Nevertheless we would maintain that based on the merits alone, the DPP government's initiative is timely and correct.

The Sichuan Earthquake occurred during a political administration change on Taiwan. The fact that disaster relief activities were initiated by the outgoing DPP's Chang Chun-hsiung cabinet makes it more symbolically meaningful than if it had been initiated by the incoming KMT's Liu Chao-hsuan cabinet. By the same token, Frank Hsieh's donation of 200,000 NT to disaster relief is more meaningful than Ma Ying-jeou's 200,000 NT donation. The ruling DPP government's relief program is significant because it offers an opportunity to conduct humanitarian cross-strait dialogue.

Taiwan's political infighting and cross-strait conflict have complicated public perception of the Chinese mainland. During the early stages of the Sichuan earthquake, the public on Taiwan seemed embarrassed, as if it didn't quite know how to react. Once upon a time, people on Taiwan referred to people on the mainland as "compatriots." But "de-Sinicization" has led to subtle change. Moreover, because leaders on both sides perceive the relationship to be one of hostility, an ambivalent relationship has developed among the people as well. The Sichuan earthquake has triggered powerful humanitarian sentiments. It has swept aside hostility and suspicion. It has led to fence-mending between authorities and people on both sides of the strait. The DPP government can and must seize the opportunity to pledge large scale disaster relief. This would amount to a clear expression of goodwill toward the mainland. Now at least, if the public on Taiwan wishes to express sympathy for disaster victims and offer assistance, they need no longer be constrained by Political Correctness.

The theme of this round of cross-strait dialogue is humanitarian and people-oriented. One could say it is a dialogue between September 21 and May 12, i.e., between the Chi Chi Earthquake in Taiwan and the Wenchuan Earthquake in Sichuan. When people on both sides of the strait experienced catastrophic earthquakes on May 12 and September 21, they knew the only real issue was how to save lives. In fact it is the common concern for authorities on both sides of the strait. When leaders on each side confront the aftermath of September 21 and May 12, they know how the other feels. The overriding concern for both sides is how to save lives. Politics is supposed implement humanitarian and humanist ideals. If the ruling and opposition parties on both sides of the strait cherish and uphold humanitarian and humanist ideals, then they can look forward to mutually beneficial relations.

The tragic scenes of disaster resemble hell on earth. This has focused everyone's attention on humanitarian concerns alone. This has forced governments to resume their proper role as servants of the people. A tearful Wen Jiabao told a young girl orphaned by the quake, "Fortunately you lived, therefore you must live on." He told her "Don't worry. The government will take care of you, will help you get an education." He spoke the orphan's pain. He also underscored the government and the nation's responsibilities. The lesson of the May 12 and September 21 earthquakes is that nations must be founded on humanitarian and humanist values. Whether one refers to China as the "People's Republic of China" or the "Republic of China" is secondary. If future cross-strait dialogue is based on humanitarian and humanist values, including democracy, it may lead to a better understanding of each others' political positions, and encourage mutually beneficial interactions. For example, the mainland authorities say they are pinning their hopes on the people on Taiwan. If one approaches the issue from a humanitarian, humanist, and democratic perspective, then when the mainland authorities say they are "pinning hopes on the people on Taiwan" they must consider what the people on Taiwan want.

The primary cause for the deterioration in cross-strait relations was not conflict between the political authorities on the two sides, but a the absence of commonly held interests among the people on the two sides. We hope the current September 21/May 12 dialogue will help the people on the two sides to reclaim lost goodwill, and through people to people contacts, encourage their leaders to improve cross-straits relations. In other words, let 23 million people and 1.3 billion people talk to each other. Let 23 million people and 1.3 billion talk to their leaders. Let the earthquake break up the cross-strait political impasse. Renew cross-strait dialogue and on this humanitarian, humanist foundation, seek common cross-strait goals.

Why is Taiwan's reaction to the Sichuan earthquake different from its reaction to the floods in Myanmar? Even before Chang Chun-hsiung announced that the government's intention to raise two billion NT for disaster relief, Wang Yung-ching and other entrepreneurs had already contributed far than that. It was perfectly natural. It was only right. No one should have expected otherwise.

The Chang Chun-hsiung cabinet's disaster relief effort is more symbolically meaningful than the Liu Chao-hsuan cabinet's disaster relief effort. And by the same token, Frank Hsieh's 200,000 NT is more symbolically meaningful than Ma Ying-jeou's 200,000 NT donation.

人道與民本：大地震給了兩岸人民對話機會！
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.05.16 02:20 am

即將交卸政權的民進黨政府宣布，對四川大地震啟動規模新台幣二十億元的賑災方案；其中包括動用第二預備金七億元，發動公務員捐一日所得，及向社會大眾募款，人道包機亦立即起飛。

此一舉動引來見仁見智的議論，異議包括：為什麼要捐款給飛彈對準台灣的中國？為什麼不以同等標準賑濟緬甸？為什麼竟在下台五天前提出如此誇張的方案？然而，我們要說：就事論事，民進黨政府的此一舉措，是及時且正確的決策。

四川大地震發生在台灣政權交接之際。台灣的賑災活動，由民進黨張俊雄內閣來發動，比由國民黨劉兆玄內閣發動有意義；正如謝長廷捐二十萬元賑災，亦較馬英九捐二十萬元賑災有意義。民進黨政府適時宣布賑災方案，最重大的意義是：給了海峽兩岸進行人道對話的機會。

近年來台灣的政治內鬥與兩岸衝突，使得台灣人對中國大陸的認知趨於複雜；四川震災發生之初，台灣社會似乎有一點不知該如何反應的尷尬。往昔曾有一度，台灣人民稱大陸人民為「同胞」；但是在「去中國化」的政客操作下，味道已漸漸變化；而且，由於兩岸主政者之間的關係時見敵意，竟使兩岸人民之間也出現微妙的芥蒂。如今，四川大地震觸發強烈的人道主題，撥開了政治的敵對與猜疑，使得兩岸當局與兩岸人民有了修補關係的對話題材；而民進黨政府能因應並掌握此一時機，宣布高規格的賑災方案，非但是向對岸表達善意，亦是將台灣人民從近年的兩岸仇恨中釋放出來。至少，現在台灣人民若欲對大陸災民表達同情並給予協助，不必再有是否「政治正確」的困擾。

這場兩岸對話的主題是人道與民本；也許可說是九二一與五一二的對話。當兩岸民眾分別經歷九二一及五一二的地震浩劫，應能共同感知，「安身立命」其實是兩岸人民最根本的共同對話主題；而當兩岸主政者分別面對九二一及五一二的善後難題，亦可共同感知，如何使人民「安身立命」，其實也是兩岸當局最根本的共同對話主題。政治，歸結而言不外即是人道與民本的實踐；兩岸朝野倘皆能珍惜維護人道與民本，自然即可望有互勉互惠的兩岸關係。

災區的悲慘場景猶如人間煉獄，使人們的思維聚焦到「人道」二字，亦使政府的職責回歸至「民本」二字。溫家寶與淚眼孤女的一場對話，「妳倖存活下來，就要好好活下去」「妳放心，政府管妳生活，管妳學習」，說出了孤兒的哀苦，也道出了政府及國家的職責。九二一及五一二震災的啟示是：一個國家，不論是中華人民共和國，或中華民國，都必須從人道出發，從民本做起；而未來的兩岸對話，若亦能以人道及民本（當然也包括民主）為基本架構，就有可能導正彼此的政治思維，發展出一種互勉互惠的兩岸互動關係。例如，中共當局若能從人道、民本及民主的思維切入，則當他們說「寄希望於台灣人民」之時，也應多想想「台灣人民的希望」是什麼？

近年來兩岸關係的惡化，最嚴重者尚不只是兩岸主政當局之間的衝突，更遺憾的是兩岸人民也失去了互勉互惠的對話題材。希望如今正在進行的這一場「九二一／五一二」對話，能夠充分釋放兩岸人民原本潛藏或壓抑的善意，再透過民間認知及心態的改善，進而供作兩岸主政者調整改善兩岸總體關係的寶貴資源。也就是說，先讓兩千三百萬人民與十三億人民「對話」，再由兩千三百萬人民與十三億人民共同向兩岸的主政者「傳話」。如此，這場地震即可能也打開了兩岸政治對立的死結，而在人道及民本的基礎上，重新找到了兩岸對話的共同新題材，與兩岸追求的共同新目標。

若問為何台灣會對四川震災及緬甸水災有不同規格及情態的反應？只要看張俊雄宣布將向民間募款十億台幣賑災之前，王永慶等數名企業家的捐款早已超逾此數，即知這是自然如此，也是應當如此，甚至是無人能使之不如此。

我們仍然認為：由張俊雄內閣啟動賑災，比由劉兆玄內閣啟動有意義；謝長廷捐二十萬也比馬英九捐二十萬有意義！