Foreign Diplomacy Must Be Neither Blue nor Green

Foreign Diplomacy Must Be Neither Blue nor Green
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
February 26, 2010

A Republic of China airliner donated to Panama for the purpose of disaster relief, is now being used as the Panamanian president's personal airliner. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has submitted a special report to the Control Yuan. The Control Yuan says our government was clearly duped. But it has urged both the Blue and Green parties to maintain a united diplomatic front. That is not merely how the Control Yuan sees it. That is also how the public sees it.

Frankly, the airliner misuse incident took us to the cleaners. The airliner was a donation, intended for disaster relief. But the president of Panama said he needed it for himself, even when it was needed for disaster relief. Since it was a gift, our government has no right to demand its return. It would be difficult to force the Panamanin president to use it as intended. If the Panamanian legislature or judiciary investigate, the government can of course explain the situation and provide information. Otherwise there is little it can do. Governments and politicians in Latin America are considerably less evolved than they are in more advanced nations. The ROC government looks askance at widespread corruption within these nations. Especially when their politicians embezzle foreign aid we have provided. It is even more intolerable that such corruption has given us a bad name. We have no desire to precipitate a show down and invite a backlash. Also, other politicians may not be any better. We could end up offending the current leader, when his replacements are no better. If the problem is not too serious, it is better to maintain the relationship, as long as it remains within tolerable limits. Therefore the Ministry of Foreign Affairs may have been disgruntled, but reacted in a low-keyed manner.

In fact, ever since Taipei and Beijing implemented their "diplomatic truce," the two sides have had a tacit understanding not to recruit the other's diplomatic allies. Governments hoping to establish diplomatic relations with Beijing have been rebuffed. In this regard, Beijing has indeed demonstrated genuine goodwill. Some governments don't understand this new form of cross-Strait interaction. They still resort to blackmail in attempts to extract concessions from Taipei. When they can't, they are shocked and disappointed. Taipei has examined its past practices. It is no longer willing to issue blank checks or swallow its pride. Requests for assistance require the submission of detailed plans. Economic aid requires closer monitoring and greater transparency. These changes require closer communication. They require support from each other's legislatures, citizenry, media, and judiciaries. Only then can we lay a foundation for diplomatic relations between two countries. Only then can we check and balance politicians' empty words or attempts at defamation.

The Control Yuan understands the government's diplomatic quandary. The Blue and Green camps must present a unified front to the outside world. They must not use diplomatic controversies to divide or embarrass society. Many people feel the same way. Taipei and Beijing have declared a temporary cease fire in their battle for Latin American diplomatic allies. The Republic of China's diplomatic service is no longer in constant fear of losing diplomatic allies. It no longer needs to nervously tally up its diplomatic allies. This is because Bejing has eased up, not because the cross-Strait strategic picture has changed. Perhaps over time, the international community will arrive at a new perspective. But a change has yet to occur. Taipei's status on the international stage remains inferior to Beijing's. Beijing's economic strength has also been elevated, relatively speaking, as a result of the global recession. This is the Big Picture Taipei faces. It will be the same no matter who comes to power, Blue or Green.

Behind closed doors, we may engage in lively political debate. But when we throw the doors open to the outside world, Republic of China citizens must act in unision. We share the same fate, the same national interests, and the same vision. We all want a peaceful, secure, prosperous, and dignified environment in which to live. On this there is no difference between any of us. Any political party must subordinate itself to this imperative, and attempt to fulfill the people's basic desires. No political party should use the national interest as a tool for political struggle. They should understand how difficult international diplomacy is. They must not stand on the sidelines and engage in sniping.

Taipei's diplomatic predicament has its roots on the opposite shore. In order to make any breakthroughs, cross-Strait relations must change. A peaceful form of interaction must be found, allowing Taipei to survive and prosper. A truce is not a rest break. Taipei cannot afford to rest. Taipei may engage in cross-Strait reconciliation and attempt to bring countrymen on both sides closer together. But Taipei has no other bargaining chips that can persuade Beijing to maintain a diplomatic truce. The truce provides Taipei with precious time and space, to ensure its future survival. It enables Taipei to maintain its relationships with existing diplomatic allies. Taipei must also seek to return to the international scene. It must shift its energies from past cross-Strait and diplomatic struggles to something more meaningful. For example, we have postponed our efforts to rejoin the United Nations. We have attempted instead to participate in organizations on the periphery, such as those concerned with civil aviation and climate change. The public hopes that our diplomatic service will eventually have something to show for its efforts. Whether Taipei will once again be invited to the World Health Assembly in May as an observer is now the focus of attention.

When it comes to the national interest, there is no Blue or Green. This includes viable, synergistic cross-Strait relations. This includes public aspirations regarding diplomacy, economics, and public welfare. Such a goal may be easy to talk about. But it is one that politicians must take seriously.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2010.02.26
社論－外交不分藍綠 台灣才能走出去
本報訊

針對我國援贈巴拿馬的救難專機被挪用為總統專機事件，外交部特別向監察院進行了報告，監委指責此事分明是被敲竹槓，但也呼籲藍綠兩黨應在外交上一致對外，這不僅是監委的想法，其實也是全民共同的心聲。

說實話，這次專機被挪用事件，台灣確實吃了悶虧。雖說當初是捐贈做為救難等多方面用途，但巴國總統堅持自己有需要用──包括必要時搭機勘災以助效率，既是送出去的禮物，台灣好像沒有硬討回來的權力，也很難強制對方總統如何使用。如果巴拿馬國會或司法機構要追究，台灣可以配合說明原委或提供資料，除此之外，能主控的事項就不是那麼多了。何況，拉丁美洲國家的政治發展和政客品質，很多和先進國家還有一段距離，有些上下其手濫權舞弊的事，台灣也並不認同，尤其如果是援助被Ａ走，台灣還落個壞名聲的話，更是嘔到一個不行。但一方面不希望撕破臉引發報復，二方面也覺得政客們都差不多，得罪了這個也沒有其他比較好的人選，如果事情不是非常嚴重，那還不如維持一個在可容忍範圍內的關係。因此外交部的反應，低調中有些無奈。

其實，自從兩岸展開「外交休兵」後，雙方都遵守不挖對方邦交國的默契，幾個想跟中共建交或兩頭喊價的國家，都碰了一鼻子灰，在這方面，中共確實表達了善意。只是因為這是一種新的兩岸互動模式，有些國家還不理解，依然訴諸過去喊價勒索吃定台灣的伎倆，等討不了好時，難免既不習慣又失望。台灣已深切檢討過去的做法，不再開空白支票或一味委屈求全，對援助的項目要求更詳細的計畫，經援的流向、執行與監督也要求增加透明度，這樣的調整，需要輔佐以更積極綿密的溝通，並且爭取對方國會、輿論、媒體、司法體系等各方面的支持，才能為兩國邦交營造基礎，並制衡政客的予取予求或空口抹黑。

監委認為台灣外交處境艱難，藍綠應該在外交上一致對外，不要利用外交撕裂社會，丟人現眼，這說出了許多人的期盼。現在兩岸在中南美的外交爭奪戰暫時休兵，台灣的外交部門不再像過去那樣一天到晚籠罩在斷交的陰影下，算邦交國數目算得膽顫心驚，這是因為中共略為鬆手，不是兩岸基本盤有任何改變。也許時間久了，國際社會可能醞釀出新的思維，但現在這個變化還沒有發生，兩岸在國際政治舞台上的地位仍然極為懸殊，而且中共的經濟力更因為全球不景氣而相對提高，這是台灣整體的處境與課題，藍綠不管誰執政都一樣要面對。

關起門來，我們內部也許競爭得火花四濺，但打開門來對外時，所有台灣人應該是一個整體，有同樣的命運、同樣的國家利益和同樣的願景。大家都希望在一個和平、安全、繁榮、尊嚴的環境中安身立命，這點你我並無不同，任何政黨都必須服從並努力實現人民的這個基本願望，不該拿國家利益做為政黨惡鬥的工具，也應該對外交工作的難處多些理解與體諒，不要一味在旁邊說風涼話。

台灣的外交困境源自對岸，要尋求突破困境，就必須能讓兩岸關係出現變化，營造一個和平的互動模式，盡量為台灣爭取生存發展的時間與空間。休兵並不是休息，台灣絕對沒有懈怠的本錢；而除了兩岸和解有助拉近人民情感之外，台灣沒有可以說服中共外交休兵的籌碼。但休兵換來的寶貴空檔攸關台灣的生存，除了繼續發展與現有邦交國的關係之外，還必須更積極尋求重返國際社會，把過去兩岸外交纏鬥的心力轉向更有意義的參與。例如我們暫緩加入聯合國的動作，轉而試圖參與民航、氣候變遷等周邊組織，在這方面民眾正等待外交部門交出成績來。而五月世界衛生組織大會，台灣能否再度以觀察員身分獲邀與會，也是大家的關切焦點。

國家利益沒有藍綠之別，這包括了一個可行、能創造良性互動的兩岸關係，以及在外交、經濟、民生等各方面實現人民的願望，這樣的方向說來簡單，卻是政治人物必須嚴肅省思的課題。