DPP Must Address Its Cross-Strait Achilles Heel

DPP Must Address Its Cross-Strait Achilles Heel
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 24, 2012

Summary: The DPP reviewed the reasons for its electoral defeat for one month. Now it is finally taking the next step. Party spokesman Lo Chih-cheng is visiting the Mainland "in an individual capacity" to conduct cross-Strait exchanges. Whether this is one small step for the DPP, or one giant leap for cross-Strait history, remains to be seen. It all depends on whether the DPP leadership has the wisdom, determination, and courage, to formulate a new cross-Strait policy.

Full Text below:

The DPP reviewed the reasons for its electoral defeat for one month. Now it is finally taking the next step. Party spokesman Lo Chih-cheng is visiting the Mainland "in an individual capacity" to conduct cross-Strait exchanges. Whether this is one small step for the DPP, or one giant leap for cross-Strait history, remains to be seen. It all depends on whether the DPP leadership has the wisdom, determination, and courage, to formulate a new cross-Strait policy.

Tsai Ing-wen, despite her enormous popularity, lost the 2012 presidential election. This amounted to a wake up call for the DPP leadership. If it refuses to honestly re-examine its cross-Strait policy, it will never return to power. As a result, before she stepped down as party chairman, Tsai Ing-wen urged the DPP to "Understand [Mainland] China while it interacts with it." Acting party chairman Chen Chu openly declared that party officials are encouraged to learn more about the Chinese Mainland and to enage in more exchanges.

Unfortunately the DPP's cross-strait policy Gordian Knot is not the result of a lack of communication. DPP county chiefs and city mayors have visited the Mainland to promote the sale of Taiwan grown fruits. DPP officials have frequently had private dealings with the other side. The DPP conducts frequent exchanges with the other side. The problem is that these exchanges have never induced the DPP to change its party line. This time Lo Chih-cheng is breaking the ice. But objections have also been voiced within the Green Camp. Former Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu criticized the party's review of its election defeat. He said the DPP had "allowed the KMT and CCP to set the agenda." He said "The responsibility of the opposition party is oversight. The ruling KMT says the DPP must conduct exchanges with [Mainland] China. If the DPP obediently complies, it amounts to opposition party negligence."

Joseph Wu's argument reflects the thinking of many Deep Green people. They believe the DPP must clearly differentiate itself from the KMT on cross-Strait policy, As they see it, the two sides are not engaged policy rivalry. They are mortal enemies engaged in a life and death struggle. The DPP has been guilty of even greater hyperbole. They have reinforced cross-Strait segregation. They have engaged in populist demagoguery each time an election rolled around. They have deliberately cast the KMT, which advocates cross-Strait exchanges, as an "organization that panders to [Mainland] China and sells out Taiwan." They have demonized Lien Chan and Ma Ying-jeou's policy of cross-Strait reconciliation as "pandering to [Mainland] China and selling out Taiwan." In the past, the DPP benefitted from such populist demagoguery. The KMT was unable to defend itself against such smears. But the biggest victim of these political dirty tricks is actually the DPP.

This time, those who voted their pocketbooks swung the the presidential election. They were praised for making a wise choice. The public perceives the two parties a certain way The KMT is responsible for exchanges. The DPP is responsible for confrontations. One plays good cop. The other plays bad cop. The result? Taiwan benefits. In other words, the confrontation between the two major Blue and Green parties may be a zero sum game for them. But it has unintentionally resulted in a division of labor. The DPP acts as a powerful counter-force. This forces the other side to make concessions to the more moderate KMT. This division of labor, ensures the ROC's sovereignty and a peace dividend for the voters. They are the biggest winners. Alas, it also relegates the DPP to the role of perpetual opposition party. It must forever play the role of opposition party.

As former Democratic Progressive Party legislator Julian J. Kuo observed, if the DPP is willing only to play bad cop, it will remain forever outside the loop on cross-Strait affairs. It will remain forever outside the loop when it comes to improving the quality of cross-Strait policy. It will remain forever outside the loop as more and more citizens vote their pocket books on cross-Strait policy. This good cop/bad cop cross-Strait scenario is clearly unfavorable to the DPP. Julian Kuo laments, "The DPP must not forever play bad cop."

The DPP is trapped within the role it chose for itself. The DPP has effectively incarcerated itself within its own cocoon. The DPP can compete with the KMT on cross-Strait policy. But it must not persist in irrational, win/lose style confrontation, It must not oppose direct links, oppose ECFA, oppose the entry of Mainland capital, oppose Mainland tourists visiting Taiwan, and oppose the recognition of Mainland academic credentials. These have made the DPP appear out of touch with reality. These have made it impossible for the DPP to win over voters.

In fact, many DPP leaders are aware of this systemic problem; The DPP has long relied on inciting cross-Strait antagonism to win votes. But this has mired them in another predicament. The DPP hopes to remake itself as a centrist party, But it fears Deep Green voters will then turn to the Taiwan Solidarity Union, or even join with Deep Green leaders in the DPP who hope to begin anew. Over the past few days, these Deep Green elements began making a move within the Legislative Yuan.  Three extremist TSU legislators experienced a meteoric rise within the legislature. Green Camp supporters have complained that the DPP is doing nothing DPP legislators are concerned that the TSU will become the tail that wags the dog, This reflects the predicament the DPP is in.

Lo Chih-cheng and others may have taken the first step, But the way forward remains strewn with obstacles, His effort may not bear fruit. But unless the DPP wishes to remain an opposition party, it cannot retreat. Fortunately, no elections are scheduled for the next two years, DPP leaders need not deal with populist pressure, They can calmly consider new cross-Strait policy paths.

Exchanges are merely the first step. DPP cross-Strait policy must be realistic. In particular, DPP legislators must change their political agenda and political style within the legislature. How can the DPP rid itself of its ideological strait-jacket?. How can it establish a stable framework for interaction with the other side? That depends on the wisdom on the party's leaders.

民進黨該思考如何從兩岸罩門脫困了
2012-03-24中國時報

敗選檢討一個月後，民進黨終於踏出一步，該黨發言人羅致政以「個人」身分登陸、進行兩岸交流；只是，民進黨一小步是否成為兩岸歷史的一大步，仍要視民進黨菁英是否有智慧、決心及勇氣，來貫徹兩岸政策轉型的工作。

二○一二總統大選，蔡英文以超高人氣敗選，終於讓民進黨菁英認知到，如果不誠實面對兩岸路線，未來將永遠和執政絕緣。於是，蔡英文在卸任前呼籲民進黨「要在互動中了解中國」，代理黨主席陳菊也公開表示，歡迎所有黨公職同仁，對中國大陸有更多了解交流。

只是，民進黨兩岸政策最大癥結，並不在缺乏交流；事實上，從民進黨縣市長赴陸賣水果、到民進黨要員私下與對岸的往來，民進黨和對岸交流不能算少，但幾乎從未影響黨的路線走向；而這次羅致政等人的小破冰，綠營內也出現異音，前陸委會主委吳釗燮就批評，敗選後民進黨內有關「與中國交流」討論，是「跳入國共設定的議題」，認為「在野黨責任是監督政府，如果執政黨說民進黨應該和中國交流，民進黨就照單全收，這將是反對黨失職」。

吳釗燮說法，反映出不少深綠人士想法，他們認為民進黨兩岸政策必須與國民黨明顯區隔，雙方不是政策競爭，而是敵我鬥爭；民進黨更是無限上綱、強化這股兩岸區隔論，在選舉時大肆民粹操作，刻意將主張兩岸交往的國民黨抹黑為「賣台集團」，連戰或馬英九的兩岸和解政策則是「傾中賣台」。過去，民進黨也許曾經從這股民粹操作中獲利，讓國民黨左支右絀，但此一惡毒招數最大的受害者，卻是民進黨自己！

事實上，這次由一成經濟選民定輸贏的總統大選，之所以被讚譽為台灣選民精明的抉擇，背後的假設在於：國民黨負責交流，民進黨負責對抗，一扮白臉一扮黑臉，台灣可獲最大利益；換句話說，藍綠兩大黨雖然零和對抗，但這卻也無意間形成一種分工架構，只要有民進黨的強烈反抗力量存在，對岸就必須對相對溫和的國民黨釋出利多；在這個分工架構中，選民可以主權及和平紅利兼顧，是最大贏家，但民進黨將成為萬年在野黨、永遠扮演反對黨的角色。

正如民進黨前立委郭正亮所說，民進黨如只會扮黑臉，將繼續自外於兩岸事務主導權，自外於改進兩岸政策品質，自外於愈來愈多的兩岸經濟選民。這種「兩岸黑白臉」論述，明顯不利民進黨發展；郭大聲疾呼，「民進黨不能老是扮黑臉」。

陷於這樣的分工架構，民進黨可說作繭自縛。民進黨可與國民黨在兩岸政策競爭，但不能是不理性的零和對抗，從過去的反對大三通、扺制ＥＣＦＡ、反對陸資、陸客來台，到拒絕承認大陸學歷等，都只是讓民進黨處處顯得與現實脫節，無法贏得選民的認同。

事實上，民進黨已有不少菁英認知到這樣的結構性困境；但在此同時併發的是，民進黨過去激化兩岸對立來贏取選票，也讓他們陷入另一個困境：即使民進黨有意朝中間轉型，深綠選民是否轉向台聯，甚或民進黨內的不滿人士出走另起爐灶；事實上，近日來的立法院運作，台聯三位不分區立委因為走激烈路線異軍突起，綠營群眾抱怨民進黨無所作為，該黨立委則擔憂會成為台聯的尾巴黨，正反映出民進黨腹背受敵的處境。

所以，羅致政等人也許踏出了第一步，但是前路險阻重重，不代表可以開花結果。但是除非民進黨真的要淪為萬年在野黨，否則該黨已無退路；幸運的是，未來兩年並無選舉，民進黨領導人比較可以不必面對民粹壓力，展開兩岸路線的檢討。

交流只是第一步，更關鍵的是民進黨兩岸政策要合乎現實，這尤其需要民進黨立委調整在國會問政內容及方式；至於，民進黨如何在兩岸政策意識形態上解套，建立起一個和對岸穩定互動的架構，就要看該黨領導人智慧了。