Neither the Government nor the Opposition Should Be Afraid To Debate ECFA

Neither the Government nor the Opposition Should Be Afraid To Debate ECFA
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 24, 2010

This time last year, President Ma specifically asked his administration to step up communications over the cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). The government issued its first statement on the matter. A year has passed. Just exactly what is ECFA? Most people still don't know. They listen, but still don't understand. According to the Wang Wang Media Group's latest poll, among the 70% who know Taipei and Beijing are about to sign an economic cooperation framework agreement, only 33% feel they understand the substance of the agreement. Two months later, according to the Ma administration's timetable, a majority of the public still does not understand it. This has led to serious Blue vs. Green confrontations over whether to sign. Both the government and the opposition refuse to publicly debate the issue. Instead, they have treated it as a political or campaign tool. This has not helped the nation's economic development. Nor has it helped to establish a national consensus.

The two sides began permitting exchanges over 20 years ago. Private sector exchanges have been akin to the river flowing into the sea -- difficult to stop. Politics has progressed from hostility to reconciliation. Economics has progressed from isolation to interdependence. Unfortunately the 60 year long cross-Strait confrontation has created a unique historical situation. It has created a peculiar atmosphere on Taiwan, one in which reunification and independence are unable to coexist. The atmosphere has become increasingly strained with increasing political openness. If reunification vs. independence disputes were merely election rhetoric, the problem would not be so serious. But reunification vs. independence issues dictate cross-Strait policy. Both government and opposition political leaders must realize that their reunification vs. independence political positions have created an insoluble dilemma for Taiwan.

The latest Wang Wang China Times poll numbers underscore the above-mentioned difficulties. According to the Wang Wang China Times poll, and a poll conducted by Commonwealth magazine and Global Views magazine, as many as 73% of the public on Taiwan feel that if the Republic of China fails to sign trade agreements with nearby countries, the failure will seriously affect Taiwan's economic development. Nevertheless 36% of the public still does not support ECFA. However, in the overall interests of the the Republic of China, over half, or 51% of the public supports ECFA. More supporters live in the North than the South. More opponents live in the South than the North. This underscores the regional differences.

Does the public really not understand that ECFA is an economic agreement? Does the public really not appreciate the international pickle the Republic of China is in? If the two sides fail to sign this agreement, the Republic of China will find it impossible to sign economic and trade agreements with neighboring countries. Does the public really not understand that the ASEAN Free Trade Area has already been launched, and that if the Republic of China falls further behind, it will be irreversibly marginalized?

There is no denying that if the two sides sign ECFA, some industries will profit and others will suffer. The government and the public must make decisions that will maximize the benefits and minimize the deficits. Who will tell us what is to our benefit? Who will tell us what is to our deficit? Besides the pros and cons, what other programs and measures are involved? The government repeatedly issues statements. It frequently introduces new talking points. The opposition party was in power for eight years. Besides accusing others of "selling out Taiwan," it has never offered any concrete reasons for its opposition. The Ma administration has repeatedly declared that it will absolutely not allow workers and agricultural products to enter from the Chinese Mainland. And yet the DPP still cites this as a reason for its criticism and opposition. It is unwilling even to do a little homework. It is unwilling to ensure that industries on Taiwan receive more benefits from the "early harvest" list to be announced in April.

Now for the vulnerable industries. Let us cite just one example. The Chen regime accused Mainland China of "dumping" cloth towels on the market. At the time, current Chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council Lai Hsing-yuan was a legislator. She led the charge. She forced the Ministry of Economic Affairs to invoke WTO standards. She demanded arbitration. Meanwhile the towel industry on Taiwan was undergoing radical upgrading. It is now producing high-quality towels. The Mainland Affairs Council has protected industries on Taiwan far better than the DPP government. The accusation of "selling out Taiwan" simply will not stick to the Ma administration. If the DPP still wants to oppose ECFA, then why not have the courage to debate it? It is time to clear the air, once and for all. Stop using simplistic McCarthyite tactics to paint Taiwan's economy into a corner.

Premier Wu Den-yih has agreed to a debate between the government and the opposition DPP. According to polls, the DPP figure the public most hopes will participate in the debate is Party Chairman Tsai Ing-wen. Tsai Ing-wen was a national security aide under Lee Teng-hui. She served as Chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council and as Vice Premier in the Executive Yuan under the Chen regime. Her thinking was clear. Her tongue was sharp. She was also familiar with the ins and outs of cross-Strait policy. She is indeed a most suitable candidate for the debate. Unfortunately Tsai Ing-wen has been dodging the debate. Late last year President Ma Ying-jeou openly declared his willingness to debate with Tsai Ying-wen, even about ECFA. Chairman Tsai demurred, and asked how can we hold a debate on issues that have not been clarified? Today, faced with intense public demand for a debate, Tsai Ing-wen's staffers are saying that if Tsai agrees to a debate, her opponent must be Ma Ying-jeou. They said that Ko Chien-min, executive director of the DPP Policy Committee, was highly qualified and would debate Premier Wu. Ko Chien-min undoubtedly has plentiful experience with the DPP's party affairs. But the public also knows that Ko Chien-min lacks eloquence. The Democratic Progressive Party is not merely terrified of a debate. It is throwing obstacles in the way of a debate.

Cross-Strait policy is an important subject that the Republic of China government can not avoid. If it is not resolved today, it will continue to confront us tomorrow. The public wants a policy debate, not verbal abuse. That is a rather modest expectation. The leaders of the ruling Blue and opposition Green political parties must take this matter seriously. They must not treat it as merely another political campaign. It concerns Taiwan's economic prosperity, and even its future.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2010.03.24
社論－論辯ＥＣＦＡ 朝野都不容怯戰
本報訊

去年此時，馬總統特別要求政府團隊加強兩岸經濟合作架構協議（ＥＣＦＡ）的溝通，首份政府說帖出爐。一年過去了，ＥＣＦＡ到底是什麼？多數民眾還是一頭霧水，有聽沒有懂。根據旺旺中時媒體集團所做的最新民調，在知道兩岸要簽經濟合作架構協議的七成多民眾中，只有三成三自認了解其內容，照馬政府的既定時程，二個多月後，這項多數人尚不明所以、卻已造成藍綠嚴重對立的協議就要簽定。然而，朝野對政策辯論卻你閃我躲，將政策做為政治或選戰工具，既無益於國家發展，遑論凝聚國人共識。

兩岸開放廿多年，民間交流如江海難擋，政治從敵對到和解，經濟從隔絕到相互依存，偏偏兩岸對峙一甲子造成特殊的歷史情境，並形塑台灣內部統獨難容的奇特氛圍，這個氛圍隨著政治開放卻愈見緊繃。如果統、獨論調僅止是選舉或政治語言，問題還沒這麼大，但是當統獨思考可能左右所有的兩岸政策時，朝野政治領袖必須意識到：他們的唯統獨論的政治立場，已經替台灣套上一個難解的困境。

旺旺中時最新民調透露數據，正完全反映上述困境。搭配另一項由天下遠見所做的民調，高達七成三的民眾認知台灣若未與附近國家簽署經貿協定，將嚴重影響台灣未來經濟發展，但還是有三成六民眾不支持兩岸簽定ＥＣＦＡ，但是若對台灣整體利益有好處，就有過半五成一的民眾支持應該簽定，而支持者北多於南，反對者則是南多於北，呈現出區域的差異性。

難道民眾不知道ＥＣＦＡ就是經濟協定嗎？難道民眾不知道在台灣困難的國際處境下，兩岸若不簽署此一架構協議，台灣和周邊國家的經貿協議很難進一步簽定嗎？難道民眾不知道東協自由貿易區自今年起已經啟動，台灣如果再慢一步，就將落入難以逆轉的邊緣化處境嗎？

無可諱言，兩岸簽署ＥＣＦＡ，有產業得利，也有產業難免受到衝擊，政府、乃至全體國民都要面對趨利避凶的政策抉擇，誰來告訴我們，利到底在哪？弊到底有多大？在利與弊之外，還有什麼配套方案與措施？當政府反覆溝通，頻頻推出新說帖的同時，曾經執政八年的在野政黨，除了「賣台」兩個字，也講不出反對的具體理由，從大陸勞工到仍在限制之列的大陸農產品，馬政府公開宣示多次，絕不開放，民進黨人照樣以此做為批評與反對的理由，甚至不肯用心做一點功課，在四月即將公布的早期收穫清單中，為產業力爭更多籌碼。

至於其他弱勢產業，舉一個最簡單的例子，扁政府時期，大陸毛巾傾銷，時任立委的陸委會主委賴幸媛，帶頭衝撞，硬是逼到經濟部援引ＷＴＯ國際規範，進行仲裁，而台灣的毛巾業者也全力轉型，現在成為高品質毛巾的代表。有比民進黨政府更保護台灣產業的陸委會把關，「賣台」兩個字無論如何套不上馬政府的頭上，民進黨還要反對，那就辯論吧，把事理一次說清楚，不要用簡單化的紅帽子策略，將台灣發展逼到死角。

行政院長吳敦義點頭應允朝野辯論，根據民調顯示，民眾最期待民進黨出馬辯論者就是黨主席蔡英文。蔡英文從李登輝執政時期就是國安幕僚，扁政府八年又歷任陸委會主委與行政院副院長，思路清晰，口才便給，又熟悉兩岸政策的來龍去脈，確實是最適合的辯論人選，遺憾的是，蔡英文對辯論始終閃躲。去年底馬英九總統接受訪問時即直接表明，願意與蔡辯論，辯論ＥＣＦＡ也可以；蔡主席的反應卻是，內涵都搞不清楚的東西怎麼辯論？如今，面對強烈要求辯論的民調，蔡英文的幕僚又拋出，蔡辯論的對象是馬，至於吳揆要辯論，派民進黨政策會執行長柯建銘出馬即可，柯建銘在民進黨內資歷豐富，毋庸置疑，但柯建銘不擅於論述，卻也眾所皆知，民進黨此舉已經不只是怯戰，而是搗蛋了。

兩岸政策是台灣不能迴避的重要課題，今日不解決，明日還是要面對，政策辯論，而非口水謾罵，只是民眾對朝野政黨最低限度的要求，朝野兩黨藍綠領袖，都必須嚴肅看待，不能只視為選戰策略操作，因為這攸關台灣的發展、台灣的未來、甚至台灣的生存。