Thursday, July 12, 2012

Ma Ying-jeou's Accomplishments and Failures, the KMT's Life or Death

Ma Ying-jeou's Accomplishments and Failures, the KMT's Life or Death
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 13, 2012


Summary: The KMT reclaimed political power in 2008. It held on to political power in 2012. This was due primarily to voter support for Ma Ying-jeou as an individual, for his personal integrity. If Ma Ying-jeou is perceived as a political failure, it means the Kuomintang as a whole can no longer be trusted. Ma Ying-jeou's failure means the KMT can no longer win the presidential election in 2016 on the basis of personal charisma. Therefore the KMT can single out Ma Ying-jeou for blame. But if the party leaves the impression it is in chaos and rotten, it will not survive.

Full Text below:

Ma Ying-jeou has announced that he is seeking another term as KMT Chairman. He said the KMT must unite and reform. It has no alternative. It cannot afford internal divisions and internal bickering.

His announcement is seen as a response to rumors he has been forced to step down. The fact is the KMT is on verge of breaking apart. This is happening on Ma Ying-jeou's watch, as both president of the nation and chairman of the party. Clearly his chairmanship was no guarantee of either party unity or party reform. The situation has been deteriorating. Had Ma Ying-jeou not been party chairman, the situation might have been even worse. Nevertheless, his chairmanship was no guarantee of good governance. The current chaos is proof of that.

Just exactly how did Ma Ying-jeou wind up in his current predicament? The main reason was his failure to effectively lead the KMT ruling administration. The ruling KMT administration failed to build the Ma Ying-jeou brand name. It failed to become a political asset. Instead it became a political liability. It became Ma Ying-jeou's worst political enemy. Ma Ying-jeou must accept the lion's share of responsibility for his administration's failure of leadership. But the ruling KMT administration can hardly escape blame.

The KMT's current challenge is not merely to address Ma's crisis of governance. It is to ensure the KMT's survival. Public opinion may one-sidedly blast Ma Ying-jeou. But the KMT cannot pretend that Ma Ying-jeou is the only one with a problem. The KMT must realize this means life or death for the KMT in 2014 and 2016.

Following the presidential election, three controversies raged. These controversies concerned U.S. beef imports, the capital gains tax, and gasoline and electricity rate hikes. These left Ma Ying-jeou with an "incompetent" label stuck to his forehead. Soon afterward, the Lin Yi-shi corruption scandal left Ma Ying-jeou with a "poor judge of character" and even "covering up corruption" label as well. Ma Ying-jeou must of course assume responsibility for this. But the KMT can hardly escape blame.

Consider these three post-election controversies from a variety of perspectives. Remain objective and rational. Clearly the administration was not wrong in principle. But these three cases were turned upside down by the controversy that raged without end. The administration dragged its feet. The public became angry. The main reason was internal KMT divisions and infighting. This provided the opposition Green parties an opportunity that they seized with relish. As a result society paid a high price. The public concluded that the Ma administration was incompetent, and treated it with contempt and hostility. Actually, the "incompetent" label on the Ma administration's forehead was put there by the "five member team" in the Executive Yuan and the KMT legislative caucus. Insinuations of "incompetence" appeared in the Ma Ying-jeou administration's internal proceedings. The sole objective of these administration proceedings was to use "internal rebellion" to depict Ma Ying-jeou as "incompetent." Ma Ying-jeou lost his "civil war." How can he possibly win any "foreign wars?"

Now take the Lin Yi-shi corruption scandal. The Lin corruption scandal has dealt a serious blow to Ma Ying-jeou. It has dealt what may be a fatal blow to the KMT. One must never judge a book by its cover. We have no shortage of Monday morning quarterbacks. But no one imagined Lin Yi-shi capable of corruption. He had such a down to earth, honest face. He had such a radiant golden boy political image. He was a model for a new generation of "native Taiwanese" political leaders. People could not imagine him in bed with corrupt embezzlers. But the roof fell in. The public learned of his arrogant folly, in both words and deeds. For the KMT, this may mean a rupture in generational succession. It may be a death knell for the KMT. Lin Yi-shi was the darling of the party. Why did he feel no sense of mission or sense of responsibility? Why was he indifferent to the KMT's good name and survival? This is a giant question mark for the Kuomintang. What the public wants to know is whether the next generation of Kuomintang leaders will be Lin Yi-shi clones.

Ma Ying-jeou's "incompetence" was confined mainly to incompetence in his leadership of the Kuomintang. The ruling Kuomintang administration spun Ma as "incompetent." The fact that they were successful proves that in this limited sense, they were right. The KMT's lifeblood has been opposition to corruption. Lin Yi-shi is a bad apple who has ruined the bunch. The KMT has succeeded in making Ma Ying-jeou look "incompetent." But that hardly makes it look "competent." Ma Ying-jeou has long relied on his image for integrity. But his image cannot withstand the negative impact of a single Lin Yi-shi. In other words, the problem originates with Ma Ying-jeou. But the problem rests with the ruling Kuomintang administration as a whole.

The KMT reclaimed political power in 2008. It held on to political power in 2012. This was due primarily to voter support for Ma Ying-jeou as an individual, for his personal integrity. If Ma Ying-jeou is perceived as a political failure, it means the Kuomintang as a whole can no longer be trusted. Ma Ying-jeou's failure means the KMT can no longer win the presidential election in 2016 on the basis of personal charisma. Therefore the KMT can single out Ma Ying-jeou for blame. But if the party leaves the impression it is in chaos and rotten, it will not survive.

If the KMT sees the issue as "Saving Private Ma," it is barking up the wrong tree. The KMT's problem is to restore order out of chaos. Ma Ying-jeou's historical legacy, his successes and failures, will determine whether the KMT survives in 2016.

馬英九的得失,國民黨的生死
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.13

馬英九宣布明年將競選連任國民黨主席。他說:國民黨除了團結、改革,沒有第二條路可走;更沒有分裂、內訌的本錢。

此一表態,被解讀為回應「逼宮」的傳言。然而,事實卻是,國民黨如今的分崩離析之局,正是發生在馬英九以總統兼任黨主席之時,可見兼任不是團結、改革的保證。情勢惡化至今,馬英九若不兼任黨主席,局面或許會更加不可收拾;但兼任絕對不是治理的保證,眼前的亂象即是證明。

細究馬英九走到今日局面的原因,主要是在未能有效領導國民黨團隊;而國民黨團隊非但未能成為馬英九的執政品牌與資源,反而成為政治負債,甚至成為馬英九最強悍的「政敵」。所以,馬英九固應承負領導失能的最大責任,但國民黨團隊亦罪無可逭。

國民黨當前的課題,不止是要挽救馬英九的治理危機,更是整個國民黨將要如何存活下去的問題。輿論可以一面倒地將馬英九轟擊得體無完膚,但國民黨內不能以為那只是馬英九一人的得失問題,而應警覺,這其實已是國民黨在二○一四及二○一六的生死問題。

總統大選後,「選後三案:美牛、證所稅、油電雙漲」鬧得沸沸揚揚,在馬英九的額頭貼上「無能」的標籤;接著,林益世案又給馬英九扣上「識人不明」、「包庇貪汙」的帽子。馬英九應當對此一體承當,但國民黨亦責無旁貸。

如今,從高低遠近的政策考量,來看「選後三案」,只要尚存一念客觀及理智者,應皆不會認為三案在原理原則上有何根本錯誤。但是,最後三案鬧得是非顛倒、拖泥帶水、民怨沸騰,主要是因國民黨內的「分裂、內訌」,供應了在野黨火上加油的操弄空間,以致付出了慘痛的社會成本,使民眾對馬團隊的「無能」產生輕視與敵視。然而,馬政府額頭上的這一張「無能」標籤,其實是「五人小組」、行政院及國民黨立院黨團自己貼上去的。最後呈現的景象是:馬英九在所有的團隊內部程序中皆出現「窩裡反」的「無能」,而所有的團隊內部程序之唯一目標,彷彿也只是要全力用「窩裡反」」來「塑造」馬英九的「無能」。馬的「內戰」失敗,豈有可能對外戰勝?

再看林益世案。林案對馬英九是一重傷,而對國民黨尤為致命的一擊。知人知面不知心,若不是事後諸葛亮,恐怕沒有人會想到林益世會貪汙;他那張「土直」的面孔,與「政治金童」的想像,一直都被視為國民黨本土新世代的樣板人物,使人不至於將他與「貪汙犯」聯想在一起。然而,東窗事發,民眾發現其言行愚妄至不可思議的地步;這其實是對國民黨接班一代的想像之破滅,也是對整個國民黨的未來寄望之破滅。像林益世這樣在黨內集三千寵愛於一身者,為何對國民黨的榮辱存亡完全沒有一點使命感與責任心?這是國人對國民黨人油然而生的一個大問號。人們現在心中的疑問是:國民黨的下一梯隊會不會由「林益世們」接班?

馬英九的「無能」主要表現在「無能」領導國民黨,亦表現在國民黨團隊以「塑造」馬之「無能」為能事;再者,國民黨的命脈之一是反貪反腐,但一個林益世簡直是一坨牛大便弄壞一鍋粥。國民黨既使馬英九「無能」,就不可能使整個執政團隊看起來「有能」;馬英九經營的反貪形象,更禁不起林益世一個人的糟蹋。也就是說,問題當然出在馬英九,但問題也出在整個國民黨團隊。

國民黨能在二○○八贏回政權,及在二○一二維持政權;無可諱言,主要是因馬英九個人的特質獲得選民的支持所致。馬英九現今的表現若被視為治理失敗,那也將被視為整個國民黨的更加不可信託;而且,馬英九的失敗,也預告了國民黨在二○一六不再可能有任何人能以個人的人格魅力贏得總統選舉,且縱目望去國民黨內也已全無具備個人人格魅力之人。因此,國民黨倘若只是馬英九一人承當失能的罵名猶可違,但若整個黨留下亂黨、爛黨的印象,那就不可活了。

對於國民黨來說,現在若只把問題看成「搶救英九大兵」,那是搞錯了方向;問題在於,這個亂黨必須撥亂反正。這是馬英九歷史定位的得失問題,更是國民黨在二○一六後還能否存活的問題。


No comments: