Tripartite Cross-Strait Scenario: DPP Must Answer to the Public

Tripartite Cross-Strait Scenario:
DPP Must Answer to the Public
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 15, 2012

Summary: After Frank Hsieh returned to Taiwan he said, Taiwan will collapse only if it stops moving forward. It will never perish merely because it made contact with the other side. This applies equally to the DPP. Consider the name of the Democratic Progressive Party. It fought for "democracy" on Taiwan yesterday. But is it fighting for "progress" on Taiwan today? How can one progress if one retreats? How can one progress if one closes oneself off?

Full Text below:

Preface: Former DPP Chairman Frank Hsieh visited the Chinese mainland. He embarked on a "trail-blazing journey." He merely broke the ice. Others within the DPP objected. That said, with this trip the DPP formally issued a cross-strait challenge. The trip will impact the DPP's cross-Strait policy direction. It has introduced a variable that will impact Taipei's long-term interaction with Beijing. This editorial examines the potential consequences of Frank Hsieh's visit to the Chinese mainland.

Former Premier Frank Hsieh has successfully completed his ice-breaking journey to the Chinese mainland. But he has yet to break the far thicker ice inside the DPP. For the past few days he has been the target of considerable ridicule and criticism. The public on Taiwan is watching to see how the DPP treats Frank Hsieh. It is watching to see how the DPP deals with cross-Strait relations. Can the DPP face cross-Strait issues head on? Can it overcome its deep-seated psychological barriers? Will its reactionary attitudes force it to pass up an historic opportunity for party transformation? Will returning to power remain nothing more than a pipe dream?

Frank Hsieh met with State Councilor Dai Bingguo, who is Secretary-General of TALSG under the CPC Central Committee. He met with State Council Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi, with ARATS chairman Chen Yunlin, and with other officials. The two sides talked past each other. But at least they talked to each other, face-to-face. At least they listened to each other, face-to-face. The DPP has made a major breakthrough in communications with the other side. But only if the DPP is willing to let it be a breakthrough.

Just prior to Frank Hsieh's departure, the Green camp and the Green media blasted him, repeatedly. But throughout Frank Hsieh maintained a rational demeanor. He did not allow himself to be used as propaganda for renunification. Eventually the DPP cooled down. Party Chairman Su Tseng-chang said cross-Strait contacts must be "open and transparent." This mentality is typical of the DPP, which invariably suspects and accuses others of "selling out Taiwan."

In recent years dramatic changes have taken place in cross-Strait relations. But the DPP's cross-Strait policy has been spinning its wheels. Occasionally someone may attempt a breakthrough. Hsu Hsing-lang once shouted, "Boldly go west!" But others with different notions immediately blasted them, forcing them to quietly return to the fold. Or else they forced them into exile. The bottom line is, the DPP is afraid of the Chinese mainland. At a deeper level, DPP leaders lack self-confidence. They have concluded that Taiwan is weak and therefore unable to confront an increasingly powerful Chinese mainland. They assume that when the two sides make contact, Taiwan will perish. They have concluded that they must distance themselves from the Chinese mainland as much as possible. Their hatred of their opponents, their opposition to them and their demonization of them, their frequent accusations that they are "selling out Taiwan," actually amount to psychological evasion.

Their reactions are out of touch with reality and out of touch with the times. They are also out of touch with public opinion. According to the latest China Times polls, 44% of the public support Frank Hsieh's "trail-blazing journey," and 51% look forward to Chairman Su Tseng-chang's trip to the Chinese mainland. Nearly 50% feel that the DPP and the Chinese mainland should be even more daring, and expand exchanges ever further. These are views that the DPP leadership needs to hear. Su Tseng-chang appears to be preparing for the 2014 election. He sees defeating his rivals within the party as his biggest challenge. So far he shows no signs of having the will or the courage to make a breakthrough in cross-Strait policy.

The times are changing. The world is changing. The two sides of the Taiwan Strait are changing. Taiwan has already adopted democracy and the rule of law. It has its own virtues. The Chinese mainland is also very different from what it was in the past. Its rapid economic rise has made it an important global market. All economies must actively seek business opportunities on the Chinese mainland, including Taiwan. People are making increasingly close contacts with each other. They are marrying each other, conducting business with each other, learning alongside each other, even producing feature films and television shows with each other. The younger generation's experience of cross-Strait relations is very different from the experience of the older generation. Their future experiences will also be very different. People on Taiwan must accurately read the signs of the times. They must strive to create a place favorable to their survival and development.

Therefore the DPP must answer several questions of utmost concern to the public on Taiwan.

One. Given the Chinese mainland's political, economic, military, and social circumstances, what does the future hold?

Two. Given the Chinese mainland's development, how can Taiwan maximize its benefits?

Three. How will the DPP prevent the two sides from breaking into war? How will the DPP create a more secure environment for the public on both sides?

Four. How will the DPP make best use of the resources and strategies at our disposal, and enable the ROC to participate in international activities. How will the DPP bolster the ROC's status as a sovereign state?

Five. How will exchanges between people on both sides of the Strait change Taiwan's social and demographic makeup? How will the DPP respond?

Six. What sort of cross-Strait relations are most favorable for Taiwan, both today and tomorrow? What concrete strategies does the DPP have to achieve them?

Do not shout slogans. Do not promise a pie in the sky. The DPP must share with the public on Taiwan its assessment of Taiwan's plight. What is its long range strategy for the future? The ROC's plight is difficult. The two sides have conflicts. But one must go forward. Time and tide wait for no man. If one always retreats, one will have no future. A nation must have hope. It must never close itself off to hide from its enemies. It must overcome its fear and anxieties. Its people must pursue their dreams. Its people must have the courage, the character, and resourcefulness to transform a foe into a friend. Can the DPP do this? If it cannot, the public on Taiwan will not entrust the DPP with its collective destiny.

After Frank Hsieh returned to Taiwan he said, Taiwan will collapse only if it stops moving forward. It will never perish merely because it made contact with the other side. This applies equally to the DPP. Consider the name of the Democratic Progressive Party. It fought for "democracy" on Taiwan yesterday. But is it fighting for "progress" on Taiwan today? How can one progress if one retreats? How can one progress if one closes oneself off?

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2012.10.15
社論－「兩岸三黨新賽局」系列一 民進黨必須回答台灣的幾個問題
本報訊

    　前言：前民進黨主席謝長廷日前訪問大陸，進行所謂的「開展之旅」，儘管只是破冰，且民進黨內有不同的聲音，但此行畢竟已讓民進黨正式走上兩岸擂台賽，不但對民進黨的兩岸政策走向形成衝擊，也為國、共長期經營的兩岸互動節奏，投下變數。本系列以此出發，探索謝長廷訪陸可能牽動的後續效應。

    　前行政院長謝長廷成功完成訪中破冰之旅，卻破不了民進黨內部更嚴密的冰層，甚至連日來遭到不少嘲諷與批判。此時，台灣社會不僅在觀察民進黨怎麼面對謝長廷，更藉此觀察民進黨怎麼處理兩岸關係，如果民進黨在面對兩岸問題時擺脫不了自己最大的核心障礙─害怕，因而保守裹足，將錯失轉型與躍進的歷史機遇；再次執政，也只是個夢。

    　謝長廷此行會見了中共中央對台工作領導小組祕書長暨國務委員戴秉國、國台辦主任王毅、海協會會長陳雲林等官員，雖然雙方還是各說各話，但至少是面對面地說，也面對面地聽。這對民進黨而言，可說是與對岸溝通的一大突破─如果民進黨願意讓它成為突破的話。

    　謝長廷出發前，綠營和綠媒罵聲連連，但謝長廷全程不卑不亢，也沒有被拿來當統戰宣傳，之後民進黨高層態度轉為低調冷淡。黨主席蘇貞昌說兩岸接觸要「公開透明」，這是民進黨懷疑及指控別人賣台的制式思維。

    　這些年來兩岸關係變化極大，但民進黨的兩岸政策一直原地、原時打轉，偶爾有人想突破，例如曾經喊出「大膽西進」的許信良，但有不同想法的人，不是立即被罵回原來的框架，就是被逐出家門。歸根結柢，民進黨對中國是害怕的，而更深層的，是缺乏自信，認定台灣很弱小，無力對抗強大的中國，雙方一接觸台灣就會滅亡，所以必須盡可能拉開距離以自保。仇視、對抗、把對手妖魔化、動輒指控賣台，其實都是另一種形式的躲避。

    　但這不僅已經與現實和時代脫節，也不符合民意。中時最新民調發現，有四四％的人支持謝長廷的「開展之旅」，五一％期許蘇貞昌主席也能有趟大陸行，近五成認為民進黨與大陸的交流應更大膽開放些。這些意見，民進黨高層要聽得進去才好。但目前蘇貞昌似乎把二○一四大選前先打敗黨內所有對手作為最大考量，因此至今沒有看到他在兩岸路線上有突破的意願和膽識。

    　時代在變，世界在變，兩岸也在變。今天的台灣早已邁入民主法治，自有自己的力量；中國大陸也和過去有很大不同，經濟迅速崛起，已經成為全球重要市場。任何國家都必須積極爭取中國商機，包括台灣。而且人民交往愈來愈密切，通婚、經商、求學乃至影視娛樂，年輕世代所體驗的兩岸關係，已經和上一代的歷史經歷截然不同，他們也應該可以有不同於過去的未來。台灣必須正確判斷時勢走向，並且努力為自己創造有利的生存發展空間。

    　因此，民進黨必須回答台灣人民幾個最關切的問題：

    　一、中國大陸現在的政經軍及社會狀況如何，這個國家未來會如何發展？

    　二、如何在中國發展過程中，為台灣爭取最大利益？

    　三、如何降低兩岸爆發戰火的可能性？為人民打造更安全的兩岸環境？

    　四、如何善用資源與策略，為台灣爭取國際參與空間，強化主權國家地位？

    　五、兩岸人民的交流將為台灣社會與人口質地帶來什麼樣的變化？如何妥善因應？

    　六、什麼樣的兩岸關係，對台灣的現在與未來最有利，如何以具體的策略逐步達成？

    　不要喊口號，也不要畫大餅，請民進黨告訴台灣民眾，它對台灣現實處境的評估、未來遠景的規畫以及實現目標的策略是什麼。台灣的處境的確艱難，兩岸之間也存在著矛盾衝突，但路是要往前走的，時代的發展浪潮不等人，總是往後退就不會有前途。一個國家的希望，絕對不在自我封閉躲避敵人，而是能夠克服恐懼憂慮，勇敢邁步追求夢想，並且以勇氣、格局與智謀化敵為友。這個，民進黨如果不能做到，就沒有資格接受台灣人民託付以集體命運。

    　謝長廷返台後說，台灣只會因為停止進步而崩潰，絕不會因為跟對岸接觸就滅亡。這段話的主詞如果換成民進黨，也非常符合現實。回頭看看「民主進步黨」這塊招牌，為台灣爭取到了「民主」之後，現在的民進黨，能無愧於「進步」兩字嗎？退縮如何進步、封閉又如何進步？