Confronting Reality: The 16-Character Formula

Confronting Reality: The 16-Character Formula
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 31, 2008

Why has the minuscule difference between "zhong hua tai bei" and "zhong guo tai bei" provoked such heated arguments?
Let's begin by examining the "16-character formulas."

Taipei and Beijing each have their own 16-character formulas. Taipei's 16-character formula is what Vincent Siew spoke of at the Boao Forum: "Confront reality, create the future, shelve disputes, seek win-win." Beijing's 16-character formulat is what Hu Jintao told Lien Chan during the Lien/Hu Summit: "Establish mutual trust, shelve disputes, seek common ground, create win-win."

What the two sides have in common is "shelving disputes and seeking (or creating) win-win." Where the two sides differ, is that Taipei stresses "confronting reality," whereas Beijing stresses "building trust."

When Taipei stresses confronting reality, it means One China, Different Interpretations. It means that the existence of the Republic of China is a hard reality that Beijing must confront. When Beijing stresses building trust, it means the One China Principle, or opposition to de jure Taiwan independence.

One China, Different Expressions includes the One China Principle. But does the One China Principle include One China, Different Expressions? This remains uncertain. This brings us back to the issue of confronting reality or maintaining the status quo. From Taipei's perspective, if one eliminates the Republic of China, then one has changed reality. From Beijing's perspective, if one eliminates the Republic of China then one has failed to maintain the status quo.

Following Taiwan's second change of ruling parties, the Rectification of Names and Authoring of a New Constitution Path and the Nation of Taiwan Path have been temporarily relegated to the sidelines. Ma Ying-jeou's Republic of China Path involves: One. Defending the Republic of China and the Constitution of the Republic of China. Not championing the Rectification of Names and the Authoring of a New Constitution. Not advocating a Nation of Taiwan. Two. Under the premise of One China, Different Interpretations, increasing exchanges with the mainland, and seeking win-win. In other words, confronting reality and creating win-win.

So far the public on Taiwan approves of the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy. This is why Ma Ying-jeou and the KMT won the Legislative Yuan Elections and the Presidential Election at the beginning of the year. This is also why the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy must continue receiving public support in the future. The Republic of China Path must be erected on the same foundation. It must recognize the Republic of China's system of democracy.

When a majority on Taiwan believes that the Republic of China Path protects the Taiwan region's interests and dignity, it will remain viable. But if it is unable to maintain the Taiwan region's interests and dignity, the public will question this path. Even the Ma Ying-jeou administration, which champions this path, will find it difficult to stay on this path.

A recent example is the dispute over "zhong hua tai bei" vs. "zhong guo tai bei." Actually, for the national team to be named Chinese Taipei (zhong hua tai bei) was humiliating enough. If is is now changed to Chinese Taipei (zhong guo tai bei) It may be necessary to boycott the Olympics. Based on its 16-character formula, Taipei's back is already against the wall, and it has no more room to retreat. Based on its 16-character formula, Beijing must not take a mile after being given an inch. The Beijing authorities regard their own change in terminology as "outside the scope of the agreement," and as "an expression of goodwill."

Taipei must procure arms from Washington. Taipei hopes to join the United Nations. Taipei's arms purchases will never reach the level where it can achieve a conventional attack capability. Arms purchases provide mainly psychological support. As for joining the United Nations, Taipei is already riding the tiger. One cannot simply shout stop and expect everything to screech to a halt. Defending Chinese Taipei (zhong hua tai bei), purchasing arms from Washington, declaring a diplomatic truce, and seeking to participate in United Nations activities, are measures the Ma administration must adopt in order to confront reality and maintain the status quo. With regards the development of cross-Strait relations, the Beijing authorities must shelve disputes and seek common ground. Otherwise how can one create win-win?

Taipei and Beijing each have their own 16-character formula. Beijing's version stresses building trust. Its intention is to oppose de jure Taiwan independence. Taipei's version stresses confronting reality. Its intention is to defend the Republic of China. In fact, confronting reality and defending the Republic of China, and building trust and opposing de jure Taiwan independence overlap to a considerable degree. Without the Republic of China there is no possibility of building trust. The Beijing authorities should adopt the same perspective in response to the "zhong hua tai bei" vs."zhong guo tai bei" controversy. It should also adopt the same perspective in response to arms purchases from Washington, a diplomatic truce, and United Nations issues.

After all, the Republic of China is a democracy. Only when the Taiwan region believes that the Republic of China can protect Taiwan's interests and dignity, will it support the Republic of China Path vis a vis cross-Strait policy. Taipei and Beijing each have their own 16-character formula. If the Beijing authorities cannot confront reality, how can it build trust with the public on Taiwan?

正視現實：兩岸「十六字訣」的共同前提
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.07.31 03:13 am

「中華台北／中國台北」，一字之差，為何爭得面紅耳赤？可從兩岸的「十六字訣」談起。

兩岸各有十六字訣。台灣方面的十六字箴言，是蕭萬長在博鰲所說：「正視現實，開創未來，擱置爭議，追求雙贏。」大陸方面的十六字方針，則是胡錦濤在連胡會所說：「建立互信，擱置爭議，求同存異，共創雙贏。」

兩相對照，雙方一致的觀點是「擱置爭議，追求（共創）雙贏」。雙方不同的表述則在：台灣強調「正視現實」，大陸主張「建立互信」。

台灣強調「正視現實」，引申之義就是「一中各表」，因為「中華民國」正是必須「正視」的「核心現實」。大陸主張「建立互信」，引申之義就是「一中原則」，亦即反對「法理台獨」。

如今的問題是：「一中各表」包容了「一中原則」，但「一中原則」是否容納了「一中各表」，尚欠明朗。這就回到了是否要「正視現實」的問題，也就是回到了是否要「維持現狀」的問題；畢竟，對於台灣而言，若無「中華民國」，「現實」就會改變；對於北京當局而言，若無「中華民國」，「現狀」亦無以「維持」。

台灣在「二次政黨輪替」後，「正名制憲」的「台灣國路線」暫告隱退，如今馬英九政府的「中華民國路線」之核心政策是：一、護守中華民國與中華民國憲法的「現實」與「現狀」，不主張「正名制憲」，不主張「台灣國」；二、願意在「一中各表」的原則下，與大陸擴大交流，追求雙贏。換句話說，這就是：「正視現實，共創雙贏」。

馬政府的兩岸政策，迄今仍受台灣民意的相當肯定，這也是馬英九及國民黨年初贏得立委選舉及總統大選的原因。基於同樣的原理，馬政府的兩岸政策未來能否持續開展進行，仍然須以獲得台灣民意的支持為前提。也就是說，前述「中華民國路線」的建立與持續，皆須築基於同一原理，那就是：必須獲得台灣民主體制的認同。

當多數台灣民眾認為，「中華民國路線」能夠維護台灣的利益與尊嚴，這個路線自然得以成立並持續；但若認為，此一路線不能維持台灣的利益與尊嚴，這個路線就會被民意質疑，甚至主張此一路線的馬英九政府亦將難以維持。

最近的事例是「中華台北／中國台北」之爭。其實，國家的隊名變成「中華台北」，已是極大屈辱；若再被改成「中國台北」，恐怕只有退賽一途。這件事，從台灣版的「十六字訣」言，已退無可退；從大陸版的「十六字訣」言，亦不可得寸進尺。北京當局此次能在「協議範圍以外」的媒體用語亦加調整，自應視為「釋出善意」。

這樣的思考，亦可推演至已經迫在眉睫的台美軍購及參與聯合國議題等。台美軍購不可能達到具備主動攻擊能力的水準，卻是台灣主體性的心理支撐；至於參與聯合國，在台灣已是勢成騎虎的政治議題，恐怕亦不能喊停就停。這些舉措，自護守「中華台北」，至台美軍購、外交休兵及參與聯合國等，皆是馬政府因「正視現實／維持現狀」而不可不為，且就兩岸關係的發展看來，大抵亦是北京當局必須「擱置爭議／求同存異」之處，否則如何「共創雙贏」？

兩岸的「十六字訣」，大陸版以「建立互信」始，其意是反對走向「法理台獨」；台灣版則以「正視現實」始，其意是在維護「中華民國」。其實，「正視現實／維護中華民國」與「建立互信／反對法理台獨」存有頗大的交集地帶；因為，無「中華民國」即無「建立互信」之憑藉可言。北京當局應當以這樣的思維，來回應「中華台北／中國台北」的爭議；並以同樣的思維，來面對台美軍購、外交休兵及聯合國議題。

畢竟，台灣是一個民主體制，唯當台灣的民意認為「中華民國」能夠維護台灣的利益與尊嚴，才可能支持「中華民國路線」的兩岸政策。就此以言兩岸的「十六字訣」，北京當局若不能「正視現實」，將如何與台灣的民意「建立互信」？