A Confident Taiwan Will Not Fear Mainland Students

A Confident Taiwan Will Not Fear Mainland Students
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 3, 2010

Twice fistfights have broken out during Legislative Yuan Educational Committee hearings on the admission of mainland students. Have the relevant bills made it through committee review? The ruling and opposition parties disagree. Martial law was lifted 23 years ago. The Legislative Yuan eliminated the "10,000 year parliament" and held all new elections. Two changes in ruling parties have occurred. The time for fistfights is long past. How long will the Legislative Yuan remain a boxing ring? If legislators persist in starting fistfights and overturning tables, whether the Blue Camp or Green Camp is in power will be irrelevant. The antics of the legislature will no longer represent the values of a democratic society.

Just before the "Two Yings" debated ECFA, the DPP provoked violent clashes over the admission of mainland students. Following their debate, the DPP legislative caucus continued to initiate fistfights. But why? What irreconcilable hatreds compel the DPP to resort to such methods to prevent mainland students from studying on Taiwan? What manner of evil scourge are mainland students -- in the minds DPP legislators?

Just before the second wave of violence erupted in the Legislative Yuan, Academia Sinica President Lee Yuan-tse said "Taiwan should welcome mainland students." Lee Yuan-tse was Educational Reform Commissioner during the Lee Teng-hui administration. He was a Principal Advisor on the president's National Policy Advisory Committee during the Chen Shui-bian administration. He identifies with Taiwan, but has never rejected the mainland. On the contrary, he and Lee Cheng-tao visited Beijing even before Taipei and Beijing allowed cross-Strait exchanges, and met with then President Deng Xiaoping. During his eight years within the Chen administration, he visited the mainland twice. He attended Yang Cheng-ning's 80th birthday party, and the international conference Tsinghua University Beijing held in Yang's honor. He also attended the 85th anniversary of the founding of Xiamen University.

Why does Lee Yuan-tse favor allowing mainland students to study on Taiwan? Because as he puts it, "a society that values education, is a society with diversity, and a variety of classes." Since the Republic of China has a democratic system, It should tolerate and even welcome diversity. Even more importantly, Lee is increasingly confident of the Republic of China's democracy. Someone with self-confidence will not be afraid of liberalization. He will not reject liberalization. No one has a clearer understanding of the consequences of allowing mainland students to study on Taiwan than university presidents. Once the nation's universities have made an assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of allowing mainland students to study on Taiwan, and have made preparations for their arrival, what justifications do legislators have to refuse?

DPP legislators say that allowing mainland students to study on Taiwan "will allow China's [sic] political elites to infiltrate and take overTaiwan." The mainland students who will come to Taiwan to study will be young people around the age of 20. How can they possibly "take over?" Even if political elites replace them, what of it? Even better. We should not exclude them. If anything, we should welcome them with open arms. Let them come to Taiwan to study. Let them be exposed to the advantages of a democratic society and a market economy. Let them convey a message of friendship from Taiwan. Once they assume positions of authority on the mainland, let them liberalize the mainland even further. Let this "powerful opponent" lean toward democracy, thereby ensuring Taiwan's security, and cross-Strait prosperity. Actually, the mainland began liberalizing 30 years ago. Already countless students from the mainland have studied in Europe and the United States. In recent years, these "haigui" (overseas returnees) have become the most important link in the mainland's development. Over the next ten or twenty years mainland elites will include "taigui" (Taiwan returnees). Wouldn't this be a feather in Taiwan's cap?

During the Two Yings Debate Ma Ying-jeou reiterated that the government welcomed oversight, and should be subjected to oversight. Ma Ying-jeou welcomed and invited questions from DPP and Green Camp legislators. But the DPP legislative caucus turned down his invitation, ten times. The DPP refused to attend public hearings, public briefings, or participate in ruling and opposition party consultations. Instead it accused the government of not being transparent. Actually, the DPP legislative caucus need merely take the tiniest bit of initiative. ECFA was never something the chairmen of the two parties needed to debate in the first place. It could have been debated and cleared up in the legislature. Unfortunately the DPP's attitude in response to cross-Strait matters, is to "Just say no!" Not content to oppose it, they have to provoke fistfights over it, undermining the image of the legislature and the reputations of legislators. The clashes over admitting mainland students are a perfect case in point.

The founding of the DPP is part of the Republic of China's democratic heritage. Senior DPP legislators persevered, playing an indispensable role in each stage of the Republic of China's transformation. Two ruling party changes have taken place. Can DPP legislators permit their forebears' inspirational words to perish amidst wars of words, and waves of physical violence? These forebears founded their party. They established the largest force in the legislature. They ruled for eight years. The party currently holds fewer than thirty seats. The DPP can no longer use its fists each time it lacks the votes. Violence is not a substitute for debate. Legislators represent the public will. A majority of seats represents the majority will. If the Ma administration fails to win the approval of a majority of the public, it will be punished by a loss of seats. Only those unable to offer a convincing argument, lose their tempers and resort to hitting people. Why does the DPP repeatedly descend to such methods? Isn't its image bad enough already?

The most important characteristic of a democratic society is the resolution of differences and the seeking of common ground through public debate. But the DPP prefers to operate outside this framework. It summons press conferences to denounce those who dare to differ, instead of dialoguing with ruling administration officials, it prefers to ignore its duty as legislators. The public pays taxes to support these legislators and their army of legislative aides. It expects them to review legislation, budgets, and policies. Instead all they do is denounce their opponents and provoke fistfights.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2010.05.03
社論－有自信的台灣 何必怕開放陸生
本報訊

為了開放陸生來台，立法院教育委員會已經連打兩架，到現在，相關法案到底算不算完成委員審查，朝野兩黨還是各說各話。解嚴迄今廿三年，立法院打出萬年國會全面改選，但是，政黨輪替已經兩次，早該過了打架議事的歲月，立法院還要打到什麼時候？如果立委肢體衝突習性不改，不論藍綠誰執政都要打架翻桌，國會議事還有何民主價值可言？

民進黨為開放陸生，在雙英ＥＣＦＡ辯論前，已經引爆一波嚴重衝突；辯論會後，民進黨立院黨團照打不誤，到底所謂何來？有什麼國仇家恨，需要民進黨立委用這種方式防堵陸生來台？大陸年輕人在民進黨立委心目中，難不成是洪水猛獸嗎？

就在立法院為陸生來台第二波開打前，前中研院長李遠哲公開表示，「台灣社會應該歡迎陸生。」李遠哲是李登輝時代的教改召集人，是扁政府時代的國政顧問團首席顧問。他認同台灣，卻從不排斥大陸，相反的，他在兩岸開放交流前，就與李政道同時受邀訪問北京，並面見當時的國家主席鄧小平；扁政府執政八年，曾兩度訪問大陸，參加北京清華大學為楊振寧八十大壽舉辦的國際學術研討會，和廈門大學八十五周年校慶。

李遠哲為什麼贊成陸生來台？很簡單，「因為對教育有益的社會，應該是多元化的環境，存在不同階層的人。」台灣既是民主社會，就應該接納、甚至歡迎多元環境，更重要的，因為他對台灣的民主，愈來愈有信心！對自己有信心的人，不會迴避開放，遑論拒絕。對於開放陸生來台這件事，沒有人比大學校長們更清楚、更深入，當全國大學院校做好一切利弊得失評估後，大都贊成並準備好迎接陸生，立委有什麼道理阻擋這件事？

民進黨立委說，開放陸生來台，「要小心中國將會接班的政治菁英滲透到台灣。」可能來台念大學的陸生，年紀不過是廿歲上下的年輕人，誰能接班？就算可能有會接班的政治菁英來，那更好，台灣不但不該排斥，甚至要大表歡迎，透過他們來台修習的數年時間，全面輸出民主開放與市場經濟的優點，傳達台灣的友善，讓他們接班後強化大陸的開放，讓「強敵」向世界民主靠攏，更能確保台灣安全和兩岸繁榮發展。事實上，大陸開放卅年，已有無數陸生赴歐美修習，近幾年，「海歸派」已成為大陸發展最重要的一環，試想，未來十年、廿年，大陸菁英階層也有「台歸派」，這不更是台灣的驕傲嗎？

雙英辯論時，馬英九特別提及政府歡迎監督，也應該監督，對民進黨所有質疑，馬英九也期待綠委嚴格質詢；但是，民進黨立院黨團已經拒絕了十次，從公聽會、說明會到朝野協商，民進黨既不聽報告，又責怪政府不透明。事實上，只要民進黨立院黨團能發揮議事火力，ＥＣＦＡ根本不必兩黨主席辯論，在國會就可以把事理辯個清楚，遺憾的是，民進黨對兩岸事務，採取的態度就是反對到底，反對也罷，還非打不可，打到國會形象盡失，立委社會聲望滑落，開放陸生來台爭端，就是最明顯的例子。

民進黨創黨迄今是台灣民主發展的資產之一，因為民進黨前輩立委們的用心用力，在台灣每一個轉型提昇的重要階段，都扮演不可或缺的角色。兩次政黨輪替之後，民進黨立委何忍讓曾經雄辯濤濤的前輩立委身影，盡數湮滅於口水戰與肢體衝突之中。從艱辛創黨、創造國會最大能量、執政八年、到如今卅席不到，民進黨不能再以數不過人頭就動拳頭，做為辯解，國會代表的是民意，多數席次代表多數民意，馬政府的政策若不得民意，自有選票定期制裁；打架，是講不出道理又惱羞成怒的人，才會採取的招數，民進黨一用再用，是嫌自己的社會形象還不夠差嗎？

民主社會最重要的就是透過公開討論，化解歧見，求同存異，民進黨寧可在正常議事程序外，舉行記者會開罵，卻不肯與政務官對話詰問，完全有失立委職責。國民納稅，付薪給立委和龐大的助理群，是要立委審查法案、預算與重大政策，立委只會罵人打架不審案，就是怠忽職守。