Tsai Ing-wen: A Gopher Yet to Stick Her Head Out of the Hole

Tsai Ing-wen: A Gopher Yet to Stick Her Head Out of the Hole
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
January 17, 2011

Taiwan independence elements have blasted Frank Hsieh's "One Constitution, Different Interpretations." They have hammered Frank Hsieh over the head. In doing so, they have simultaneously issued Tsai Ing-wen a warning. This intense reaction from Taiwan independence elements means they have drawn a line in the sand regarding the DPP's 2012 presidential campaign cross-Strait policy platform.

Party elders have dismissed Frank Hsieh's "One Constitution, Different Interpretations" as "word games." In fact, Frank Hsieh's rhetoric is merely a restatement of the DPP's "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." For example, it recognizes the ROC Constitution. It affirms that changing the status quo requires a referendum and must accord with the constitution.. These cover essentially the same ground as the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. As for Frank Hsieh's opposition to the "One-China Principle," that is merely an extension of the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. The resolution states, "According to the current constitution, the name of the nation is the Republic of China." This means that in the future the name might not be the Republic of China, and that the DPP might found an independent "Nation of Taiwan." In other words, Frank Hsieh's merely made another argument for "backdoor listing," not so different from the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. The Resolution on Taiwan's Future was already a word game. Frank Hsieh's One Constitution, Different Interpretations is merely a "word game within a word game." The DPP supports the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. So why are Taiwan independence elements reacting so strongly to Frank Hsieh's One Constitution, Different Interpreations?

Frank Hsieh is chopping the constitution into two halves, Internally, he recognizes the ROC Constitution. Externally, he calls for One Constitution, Different Interpretations. Taiwan independence elements are reacting only against One China, Different Interpretations. They consider One China, Different Interpretations word games. They also oppose Frank Hsieh explicitly recognizing the ROC Constitution. Taiwan independence elements feel that recognizing the Republic of China makes it difficult to repudiate the One China Constitution. This shows us that Taiwan independence elements have always opposed the backdoor listing strategy adopted in the Resolution on Taiwan's Future. Taiwan independence elements advocate the "Rectification of Names." Therefore how can they possibly advocate recognition of the Republic of China Constitution? Frank Hsieh was merely the first gopher to stick his head out of the hole. That's why he got hammered. The treatment he received of course sent Tsai Ing-wen a stern warning.

The prospects for Tsai Ing-wen are bullish. Taiwan independence elements are simultaneously hopeful and wary. They are taking a number of measures. The first is to resolutely oppose the 1992 Consensus and One China, Different Interpretations. That is why they oppose the One China Constitution and the Constitution of the Republic of China. Next, they oppose choosing a presidential candidate by polling the entire population. These are all measures intended to restrain Tsai Ing-wen, whom they consider "very un-DPP like." What happened to Frank Hsieh today was intended as an object lesson for Tsai Ing-wen.

Taiwan independence elements support Annette Lu. They of course have no illusions about Annette Lu's election prospects. They are doing so merely to contain Tsai Ing-wen, They want Tsai to pay attention to the views of "party members." Annette Lu is chummy with Taiwan independence elements. But she doesn't really think Tsai Ing-wen can get away with repudiating the August 1, 1992 resolution of the National Unification Council. The resolution stipulates that both sides adhere to the One China Principle, but each side interprets One China differently. This reveals the chaos within the DPP regarding its power arrangements and ideological direction. Annette Lu sees it, Tsai Ing-wen sees it too. Tsai Ing-wen finds herself squarely on the horns of a dilemma.

Taiwan independence elements hammered Frank Hsieh over the head. Their bottom line is opposition to the 1992 Consensus and One China, Different Interpretations. They oppose explicit recognition of the Republic of China and the Constitution of the Republic of China. They, unlike Frank Hsieh, are unwilling to play wordgames with the Republic of China and the One China Constitution. Cross-Strait policy will be an issue during the 2012 presidential election. The DPP is likely to fulfill Chen Shui-bian's prophecy. He warned Tsai Ing-wen that if she "opposed the 1992 Consensus, then she cannot perpetuate the policies of the previous adminstration after she is elected." In other words, if Tsai Ing-wen opposes the 1992 Consensus, she has no reason to support or maintain the 1992 Consensus, since it is the foundation and prerequisite for all cross-Strait relations, including ECFA. What will Tsai Ing-wen do? Will she accept the demands laid down by Taiwan independence elements when she enters the presidential race? Or will she proclaim "Five Noes" after she is elected president?

Frank Hsieh hoped to generate a climate of opposition to the 1992 Consensus within the party. He thought he could use ambiguous word games to lead the party out of its dilemma. Who knew Taiwan independence elements did not appreciate his slippery rhetoric. They hammered him over the head. He is now seeing stars. Tsai Ing-wen witnessed the results of Frank Hsieh's unsucessful trial balloon. Will she be able to play any wordgames with her "Platform for the Coming Decade?"

蔡英文是尚未伸出頭來的另一隻地鼠
【聯合報╱社論】 2011.01.17

獨派對謝長廷所提「憲法各表」大反彈，不但使謝長廷滿頭包，更是殺雞嚇猴給蔡英文看。獨派的強烈反應，形同給民進黨二○一二總統大選的兩岸論述劃下了一條底線。

謝長廷的「憲法各表」被黨內大老說成「文字遊戲」。其實，從某種角度來說，這套論述只是用另一種語言來表達《台灣前途決議文》；比如說，承認中華民國憲法，並稱，若要改變現狀，須經公民投票及修憲決定。這些皆大致不出《台灣前途決議文》的範圍。至於謝長廷稱反對「一中原則」，其實也是《台灣前途決議文》之引伸；因為，決議文說，「依目前憲法稱為中華民國」，其意即指「未來」未必仍是「中華民國」，而可以另建台灣國。換句話說，謝長廷的論述主軸仍是「借殼上市」，與《台灣前途決議文》並無太大出入；而《台灣前途決議文》已是「文字遊戲」，謝長廷的「憲法各表」則是「遊戲中的遊戲」。民進黨既曾支持《台灣前途決議文》，為何獨派竟會對謝長廷的「憲法各表」如此大反彈？

謝長廷將憲法切成兩半，對內承認中華民國憲法，對外「憲法各表」。而獨派此次的反應，卻是不但反對「憲法各表」（認為那只是「一中各表」的「文字遊戲」）；更反對謝長廷以正面論述承認中華民國憲法；因為，獨派認為只要承認中華民國，就難以否棄「憲法一中」。此一立場證實了獨派一向反對《台灣前途決議文》所採「借殼上市」的投機策略；獨派主張「正名制憲」，豈能承認「中華民國憲法」？只因謝長廷是第一隻伸出頭來的地鼠而被大槌轟擊，這對蔡英文當然是一個嚴重的警告。

蔡英文的聲勢看好，獨派對其既期待又警戒。獨派採取的對策，首先是堅決反對「九二共識／一中各表」（因此亦反對憲法一中，反對中華民國憲法），其次是反對總統候選人以「全民調」產生；這些皆是為了對「很不像民進黨」的蔡英文有所節制。如今謝長廷這隻地鼠的下場，足為蔡英文的殷鑒。

獨派拱呂秀蓮，當然不是看好呂秀蓮；而是欲用呂秀蓮來牽制蔡英文，要蔡重視「黨員」的意見。而呂秀蓮一方面拉攏獨派，另一方面卻又認為蔡英文不能否認一九九二年八月一日國統會的決議（海峽兩岸均堅持「一個中國」之原則，但雙方所賦予之涵義有所不同），尤其顯得民進黨內權力及路線鬥爭之錯亂。呂秀蓮有此見地，難道蔡英文會沒有？事到如今，蔡英文的處境，已是進退維谷。

獨派借謝長廷這隻地鼠祭旗，其劃出的底線是：反對「九二共識／一中各表」，亦反對正面承認中華民國及中華民國憲法；也不可如謝長廷那般玩弄「中華民國」與「憲法一中」分離的「文字遊戲」。在這樣的前提下，民進黨二○一二總統大選的兩岸論述，就很可能步上陳水扁的預言，他警告蔡英文：「反對九二共識，就不能在執政後延續前朝兩岸政策。」也就是說，蔡英文若「反對九二共識」，她也就沒有理由贊成或維持以「九二共識」為基礎及前提所建立的所有兩岸關係（包括ＥＣＦＡ等等）。蔡英文將接受獨派這樣的訓令而參加總統大選，或在若選上總統後再來「四不一沒有」？

謝長廷欲掙脫「反對九二共識」的黨內氛圍，自以為可用模稜兩可的「文字遊戲」帶領全黨脫困，不料獨派對他的自作聰明並不領情，且一槌子打得他眼冒金星。蔡英文目睹謝長廷「拋磚引玉」的下場，她將在《十年政綱》中玩出怎樣的「文字遊戲」？