Shouldn't the DPP Reexamine Its China Policy?

Shouldn't the DPP Reexamine Its China Policy?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
September 7, 2009

The Dalai Lama has left Taiwan. The Democratic Progressive Party, having shot itself in the foot, sits in silent embarrassment.

The Democratic Progressive Party invited the Dalai Lama to Taiwan in order to sabotage cross-Strait relations. Instead, it provoked intense public suspicions and invited a powerful public backlash. The Dalai Lama was humiliated and forced to cancel his press conferences. It also precipitated political dissension and power struggles within the party. In the end, this ostensibly earth-shaking event turned out to be all thunder and no lightning. It amply exposed the DPP's superficiality, crudity, recklessness, inability to withstand political heat, and its failure to see the forest for the trees.

Chen Chu visited the Mainland in May. For the sake of the Kaohsiung World Games, she expressed goodwill towards Beijing. The World Games went off spectacularly. Yet three months later Chen Chu invited the Dalai Lama to Taiwan. The Mainland accused her of "harboring ill intent." Chen Chu may be delighted with herself for having slapped Beijing in the face. But when an experienced politician such as Chen Chu commits such a policy blunder, when she contradicts herself, when she behaves in such a shallow and crude manner, she is really slapping herself in the face. Some people are actually saying that Chen Chu's chicanery showed "guts," and qualified her to be president. What are such assertions but a bad joke at Taiwan's expense? What is the DPP's China policy? Does the DPP even have a China policy?

In fact, Chen Chu's confusion is merely a reflection of the DPP party hierarchy's confusion over China policy. Chen Shui-bian once championed the "Five Noes." He swore to "defend the Republic of China to the death." He said "Taiwan independence is self-deception. If it can't be done, it can't be done." But now he is championing the "Rectification of Names" and "de jure Taiwan independence." He has effectively hijacked the Democratic Progressive Party. Chen Chu "showed goodwill to Beijing for the sake of the World Games," but then "invited the Dalai Lama to visit Taiwan in order to provoke Beijing." Her actions were a knock-off of Chen Shui-bian's. Chen Chu's "Pearl Harbor sneak attack" ranks with Chen Shui-bian's political stunts, such as his "Lost Flight to Libya," his "Referendum to Join the UN," and his "Rectification of Names, Authoring of a New Constitution." Besides its "hit and run" approach, what kind of long-term China policy does the DPP have?

Chen Chu should not flatter herself by imagining that she possesses some sort of charisma. If not for the atmosphere of cross-Strait reconciliation achieved over the past year, and the mutual trust established between the Ma administration and Beijing, could Chen Chu have pulled off the Kaohsiung World Games so successfully? Does Chen Chu have the slightest inkling of how difficult it will be to repair the damage done to cross-Strait relations by her invitation to the Dalai Lama?

Everything Chen Chu achieved, including the World Games and her invitation to the Dalai Lama, were achieved under the aegis of the Republic of China and the Ma administration. The DPP originally assumed President Ma would refuse to approve the Dalai Lama's visit. It would then use his refusal to demonize Ma Ying-jeou. But when President Ma promptly approved by the Dalai Lama's visit, the DPP was forced to confront both Beijing and the public on Taiwan. The DPP's superficiality, crudity, recklessness, inability to take political heat, and failure to see the forest for the trees, were soon exposed for all to see. Over the years Chen Shui-bian has used the Republic of China as a political stage for his "Rectification of Names and Authoring of a New Constitution." But if there were no Republic of China, Taiwan independence would probably find itself in the same dilemma as the Dalai Lama's government in exile.

As we have said, Taiwan independence can be useful in the defense of the Republic of China's sovereignty. But the DPP's attempts to manipulate Taiwan independence can only tear society apart. They cannot defend it against Beijing. Taiwan independence is a cancer. It survives by consuming the Republic of China, body and soul. Once the Republic of China dies, once the parasite's host dies, the cancer cells can no longer survive on their own. And yet the DPP remains mired in its self-contradictory "Taiwan Independence Party Platform," its "Resolution on Taiwan's Future", and its "Resolution for a Normal Nation." It allows itself to be hijacked by Chen Shui-bian's calls for "de jure Taiwan independence." Is this really the DPP's China policy?

Chen Ching-chun said that inviting the Dalai Lama was a case of "trading short term gains for long term losses." Actually, the short term gains are so short as to be merely overnight gains, after which there is hell to pay. Aren't such gains a little too "short term?" The DPP's China policy is short-sighted. But if its policy is this short-sighted, what kind of long term hope can it offer? Shouldn't the DPP undergo a major reexamination of Its China policy?

Ma Ying-jeou's political and administrative failures should have provided the Democratic Progressive Party with the ideal opportunity for a political comeback. But if the DPP cannot formulate a balanced and sensible China policy, the public on Taiwan is not about to hand the nation over to the DPP. Even if the DPP is fortunate enough to regain political power, without a durable China policy it will only precipitate a national tragedy. The Democratic Progressive Party invited the Dalai Lama to Taiwan. From beginning to end, it was a microcosmic reenactment of the DPP's self-contradictory China policy.

The DPP should recall Lin I-hsiung's comments regarding Chen Shui-bian's 2005 mainland policy. He said, "Small nations must relate to large nations on the basis of sincerity. If its political leaders attempt to be devious, and engage in large nations by means of political intrigue, they cannot escape the clutches of large nations. It will be the kiss of death."

民進黨難道仍不該中國政策大辯論？
【聯合報╱社論】
2009.09.07 03:50 am

達賴離台，民進黨備嚐聰明反被聰明誤的啞巴虧。

民進黨邀請達賴來訪，撕裂了兩岸關係、引爆主流民意的強烈質疑及反彈，更使達賴受盡被迫取消記者會等屈辱，又在黨內牽動路線及權力紛爭……。這麼一件轟動世界的大事，到頭來卻折騰得幾乎一無是處；充分暴露出民進黨的膚淺、粗魯、不計後果、不堪一擊，與見樹不見林。

陳菊在五月登陸，為高雄世運向北京示好，將一場世運辦得風風光光；詎料，三個月後，陳菊竟邀訪達賴，被大陸方面指為「包藏禍心」。陳菊或許以打了北京一耳光而自豪，但一個資深政治人物的決策錯亂、矛盾、膚淺、粗魯到這種地步，其實是陳菊自己打了自己一耳光。現在竟傳出陳菊如此魄力有資格選總統的說法，這豈不是台灣的醜聞笑話？請問：民進黨的中國政策是什麼？民進黨有沒有中國政策？

陳菊的錯亂，其實只是源源本本地反映了民進黨中國政策的錯亂。陳水扁曾宣示「四不一沒有」、「誓死捍衛中華民國」、「台獨是自欺欺人、做不到就是做不到」；現在卻以「正名制憲／法理台獨」的教主自命，迄今仍挾持著民進黨。陳菊的「為世運向北京示好／邀訪達賴挑釁北京」，簡直是陳水扁的山寨版；而陳菊此次的「珍珠港突襲」，亦與陳水扁「謎航利比亞」、「入聯公投」、「正名制憲」等政治操作如出一轍。民進黨除了這種「撞了人就跑」（hit and run）的手法以外，還有什麼可長可久的中國政策？

陳菊莫以為自己有什麼魔力。倘若不是近一年多來兩岸大和解的氛圍底定，陳菊以為憑她就能將高雄世運辦得如此風光？再倘如不是馬政府與北京的互信尚稱穩固，陳菊難道不知她此際邀訪達賴可能會使兩岸關係受到難以修補的傷害？

不論陳菊辦世運或邀訪達賴，皆是在中華民國與馬政府的屏障下進行的。民進黨原本以為馬總統不敢批准達賴來訪，即可全力醜化馬英九；但當馬總統一旦批准了達賴來訪，民進黨被迫必須直接面對北京及面對台灣的民意，民進黨的膚淺、粗魯、不計後果、不堪一擊，與見樹不見林，立即原形畢露。正如陳水扁過去多年以中華民國為「正名制憲」的舞台，假設沒有中華民國，台獨恐怕就要如達賴一般變成流亡政府了。

我們曾說：台獨對台灣主體性的主張十分可貴，但民進黨操弄的這一套台獨，徒有撕裂台灣社會的作用而已，根本不能用以對抗中國。台獨是癌細胞，以噬食中華民國的靈肉而存活；一旦中華民國滅亡，寄主既死，這些癌細胞亦必無生理。但民進黨迄今仍陷於「台獨黨綱」、「台灣前途決議文」、「正常國家決議文」的矛盾糾纏之中，甚至仍被主張「法理台獨」的陳水扁所挾持，難道這就是民進黨的中國政策？

陳景峻說，邀訪達賴是「短多長空」。但是，這個「短多」竟然「短」到只有一夕之間就豬羊變色，也未免「短」得太過頭了吧？民進黨的中國政策倘若竟是短視、短線到了這種地步，還有什麼可長可久的寄望可言？難道民進黨仍不該進行中國政策大辯論？

馬英九在政治及行政操作上的失敗，原本是民進黨東山再起的最佳背景。但是，民進黨若不能重建一個平衡理智的中國政策，台灣人民恐怕再也不敢把國家交給民進黨去開玩笑；即使民進黨僥倖重新取回政權，卻無可長可久的中國政策，亦將造成國家的悲劇。民進黨此次邀訪達賴的因果始末，即是民進黨矛盾錯亂的「中國政策」之縮影。

此時此際，民進黨應回味林義雄在二○○五年對扁政府大陸政策的評論，他說：「小國與大國良好互動的前提是真誠，如果政治領袖自作聰明，與大國互動時爾虞我詐，最後逃不出大國的掌心，等於是自尋死路。」