Assistance from Washington and Beijing is Humanitarian Assistance

Assistance from Washington and Beijing is Humanitarian Assistance
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 18, 2009

The day before yesterday, at 14:45, a camouflaged United States military C-130 transport plane flew from Okinawa and landed at Tainan Air Force Base, carrying disaster relief materiel for the 8/8 Flood. This was the first time a United States military aircraft has landed on Taiwan since Taipei and Washington broke off diplomatic relations in 1979.
High-ranking ROC officials set the tone, saying that "Humanitarian assistance transcends politics." Yang Yi, spokesman for Beijing's State Council for Taiwan Affairs said, "This is humanitarian assistance made available to Taiwan by the government through private channels." And so it was with the U.S. warships carrying rescue helicopters that arrived on Taiwan yesterday.

The bottom line is, this is a humanitarian issue. The United States government's decision to send equipment may have been a political and administrative decision. But fundamentally it was humanitarian in nature. By the same token, Yang Yi, spokesman for Beijing's State Council for Taiwan Affairs, may need to take into account political factors. But in the end it is still humanitarian assistance.

Humanitarianism trumps politics. One might even say that the evolution of human civilization in the twenty-first century means that the raison d'etre of politics is humanitarian. Politics that turns its back on humanitarianism, whether cross-Straits or international, amounts to reactionary thinking on the wrong side of history.

Some self-proclaimed "military experts" in the legislature have cited this development, and implied that in the event of a man-made disaster such as war, the U.S. Cavalry would also come riding to the rescue. They merely reveal their superficiality. At moments like this, no one has the right to make political hay from solemn humanitarian issues. Whoever exploits such an occasion to sully humanitarism with politics, who uses humanitarism as a political tool, merely reveals his own ignorance and myopia.

As time passes, and history unfolds, mankind and human consciousness have demonstrated the capacity to evolve to more advanced levels. Think back ten years, to the 9/21 Earthquake. The Beijing authorities, speaking through Sun Aiming, Secretary-General of Mainland China's Red Cross, said that any nation wishing to provide Taiwan earthquake relief, would be required to obtain prior consent from Mainland China's Red Cross. On 9/22 Russia sent AN-124 transport planes to Taiwan to conduct large-scale rescue operations. Beijing forbade Russian planes from transitting through Mainland China's airspace, Rescue operations were delayed 12 hours while Moscow negotiated with Beijing. When we recall this scenario a decade later, we can't help thinking, "How cruel. how obtuse."

Therefore when Yang Yi characterized Mainland China's facilitation of the U.S. government's disaster relief effort as humanitarian aid, it was a sign of major progress. As we can see, humanitarian values are the highest political values. Political values hostile to humanitarian values don't stand a chance. Compare Sun Aiming's statement ten years ago, with Yang Yi's statement ten years later. Who was right and who was wrong? Who was being wise, and who was being obtuse? No comment is needed, and the answers are self-evident.

During last year's Sichuan Earthquake, the ruling and opposition parties launched elevated and earnest disaster relief operations. Even today, volunteer groups from Taiwan are busy at work in Sichuan disaster areas. Last year, a UDN News editorial asked KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung to convey a message to CCP General Secretary Hu Jintao: "The two sides may not be able to avoid earthquakes and other natural disasters, but they can work together to avoid war." Chairman Wu carried this message to the Mainland, and the Mainland public expressed support for this way of thinking. The Taiwan public's grass-roots response to the Sichuan Earthquake was humanitarian in nature. It had a major influence on the thinking of authorities on both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

Ten years ago, the Mainland government donated three million USD to 9/21 Earthquake relief, through the Mainland China Red Cross. Ten years later, Mainland-based private citizens and quasi-governmental organizations donated funds in their own name. The amount of materiel donated greatly increased, and include modular housing units. As we can see, the attitude and conduct of the Mainland has changed significantly for the better.

As we see it, we ought to be as accepting as possible to assistance from the Mainland. We should even allow Mainland volunteers and charitable organizations to visit the disaster areas. Even if alternative resources are available, and Mainland assistance is not indispensable, we should promote cross-Strait humanitarian exchanges. We should encourage the volunteers from Taiwan engaged in earthquake relief in Sichuan. We should welcome Mainland volunteers to disaster areas on Taiwan. We should allow humanitarian exchanges to soften and improve cross-Strait political relations. If the two sides can assist each other during earthquakes and typhoons, humanitarian sentiments may reduce the likelihood that both sides will slaughter each other with missiles and artillery. After all, mutual support is surefly preferable to mutual destruction.

If we think in these terms, we may even consider allowing the shipment of Mi-26 helicopters from the Mainland. The only real obstacle would the public's inability to take such a leap at this moment in time.

As noted above, the highest political values are humanitarian values. Neither cross-Strait nor international politics may take precedence over humanitarianism. In cross-Strait relations, the micro-climate formed during earthquake and flood relief operations is humanitarian in nature. The macro-climate formed by humanism and other transcendant values is also humanitarian in nature. Humanitarian cross-Strait exchanges during earthquake and typhoon relief efforts may have far-reaching implications for the "peaceful development" of cross-Strait relations.

人道，美國與中國的援助皆是人道！
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.08.18 03:54 am

前天下午二時四十五分，一架「低辨識度塗裝」的美國C-130運輸機，自琉球飛抵台南空軍基地，完成運載八八水患救災物資的援助任務。這是一九七九年台美斷交以來，首度有美國軍機在台灣降落。

我國政府高層將此舉定調為：「人道援助／超越政治。」北京方面，國台辦發言人楊毅則表示：「這是有關國家通過民間渠道，對台灣實施人道主義援助。」昨天續有美艦將救災直升機運抵台灣，亦當作如是觀。

此事在本質上是一個人道事件。即使美國作出派機的決定必然是一政治及行政的決定，但此舉的根本底蘊仍是「人道」；同理，即使北京國台辦發言人楊毅必須慮及此一事件的政治因素，但最後仍將此舉定義為「人道主義援助」。

人道高於政治。甚至可說，人類文明發展至二十一世紀的今日，「政治」的最高目標就是「人道」；背離「人道」的政治，無論在兩岸或國際，皆是悖天逆人的反動思維。

因而，有些自命為「軍事專家」的立委，將此事解釋為「意謂假如有『人禍』，美軍也會來救援」，只是徒顯其淺薄而已；此時此際，實不必將一個莊嚴的「人道」事件，硬行套入「政治」的八股公式中。誰在此際想用政治來污染人道，或用人道來操弄政治，皆是不識時務、不識大體。

時勢推移，歷史遞嬗，人物及思潮皆有可能向前向上提升發展。回顧十年前的九二一大地震當年，北京當局曾經透過中國紅十字會秘書長孫愛明對外表示，任何國家要援助台灣地震，須先徵得大陸紅十字會的同意。當時，俄羅斯在九二二即決定以AN-124大型運輸機進行救援行動，北京方面竟曾一度拒絕俄機過境假道，以致救援行動在交涉折衝中遲誤了十二小時。將這些歷史鏡頭，拿到十年後的今天對照來看，那是何其殘忍，又是何其愚昧？

因而，楊毅今天能在第一時間將美機執行救災任務定義為「人道主義救援」，這不能不說是十年來的重大進步。可見，人道是政治的最高準則，背離人道即不可能有成功的政治。十年前孫愛明的發言，與十年後今日楊毅的發言兩相對照，是非智愚，不言可喻、不辨自明。

去年四川大地震，台灣朝野在第一時間即發動高規格、高熱忱的救災行動，直至今日仍有台灣的志工團體還在四川災區工作。當時，本報社論曾請即將訪陸的國民黨主席吳伯雄，帶給中共總書記胡錦濤一句話：「兩岸不能避免地震等自然災害，但可以共同避免戰爭。」吳主席後來把話帶到，大陸輿論亦頗支持此想。如今回顧，主要出自台灣民間自發的對四川大地震的「人道互動」，對於兩岸當局後來的思維及心態應皆產生了重大的啟示與影響。

十年前，大陸以中國紅十字會對九二一震災捐輸了三百萬美金；十年後，大陸民間及半官方機構也以個別身分捐款捐物，且捐助的物資在數目上增加了很多，在品項上也包括了組合屋等更具多樣性。可見，十年之間，在觀念及行為上皆有顯著進展。

我們的看法是：對於大陸的援助，應當盡可能地開放；甚至接受大陸志工或慈善團體到災區現場工作。即使已有替代資源而未必有實際需求，但亦應盡量促成兩岸的人道互動。台灣進入四川震災區的志工應被鼓勵，大陸來台的慈善志工也應受歡迎。其目的正是要用人道來軟化及改善兩岸的政治關係。我們相信：如果兩岸在地震、颱風中能從相互救援的互動，領悟那種崇高善良的人道情懷，則未來兩岸用飛彈大砲相互殘殺的可能性應可大幅降低。畢竟，相互毀滅，不如相互成全。

若持此想，我們甚至認為，接受大陸米二六直升機來台也是可以考慮的；只是當前輿情恐怕仍跳不出這個框架。

前文說：政治的最高目標就是人道；兩岸及國際的政治，皆不能背離人道。尤其，對兩岸而言，不僅地震水災等救災行動的「小氣候」是人道，且民主人本等高遠追求的「大氣候」也是人道。從兩岸地震颱風的人道互動中，對兩岸未來的「和平發展」應有深遠的啟示作用。