Support for Wang becomes Opposition to Ma: Long Live DPP Opportunism

Support for Wang becomes Opposition to Ma:
Long Live DPP Opportunism
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
September 16, 2013

Summary: The Wang Jin-pyng influence peddling scandal has morphed into a political power struggle. From any perspective, this is an unmitigated disaster for Taiwan. It is a sad day for Ma and Wang as well as for the general public. The only party experiencing a sense of "Schadenfreude," is the DPP. Su Tseng-chang seized the opportunity to demand the impeachment of President Ma. The "star" of the influence peddling scandal, Ker Chien-ming, puffed up his chest with an air of self-righteousness and demanded an apology from President Ma, urging him to "engage in self-introspection."

Full text below:

The Wang Jin-pyng influence peddling scandal has morphed into a political power struggle. From any perspective, this is an unmitigated disaster for Taiwan. It is a sad day for Ma and Wang as well as for the general public. The only party experiencing a sense of "Schadenfreude," is the DPP. Su Tseng-chang seized the opportunity to demand the impeachment of President Ma. The "star" of the influence peddling scandal, Ker Chien-ming, puffed up his chest with an air of self-righteousness and demanded an apology from President Ma, urging him to "engage in self-introspection."

As the matter now stands, will the influence peddling scandal be totally forgotten? Will President Ma and the Special Investigation Unit continue to be demonized? Will those guilty of influence peddling continue to thumb their noses at justice and carry on with their crimes? Partisan politics in the legislature has been hijacked by a new, perverse manifestation of "bi-partisan cooperation." What sort of cesspool will Taiwan's politics become? When good and evil have been inverted so perversely, can society still discern right from wrong?

The DPP exploited the recent scandal. It sat on the sidelines, inciting conflict, making phony demands for constitutional interpretations, launching a movement to bring down Ma. From beginning to end, it revealed its opportunistic colors. It refused to engage in any soul-searching whatsoever over DPP Party Whip Ker Chien-ming's influence peddling. This further underscored the fact that the only idol it worships is opportunism. The DPP once boasted that it "judged itself according to the most stringent ethical standards." This boast has been reduced to ashes. The DPP has renounced all sense of morality and shame. Yet it trumpets "due process" and "support for constitutional law." Can people still give its claims the slightest credence?

According to a poll conducted by this newspaper, 67% of the public believes the KMT Disciplinary Committee's punishment of Wang Jin-pyng was "too harsh." But 48% of those polled also believe the DPP must impose party disciplinary measures on Ker Chien-ming. Yet the DPP ignores this, and blanks it out of awareness. Yu Ying-lung spoke during the "DPP Eight Years in Office Symposium." He said Wang Jin-pyng should be "grateful for the misery" Chen Shui-bian suffered. It made the public on Taiwan deeply skeptical of the Special Investigation Unit. This enabled Wang Jin-pyng to escape punishment for his own influence peddling. This is certainly a bizarre interpretation of the value of "Ah-Bian's Suffering." The Chen family engaged in shameless corruption for six years. And the lesson the DPP learned is how to be more brazen in its criminality?

During the recent influence peddling scandal, the DPP vigorously supported Wang JIn-pyng. Its behavior was bizarre. More than a few people within the party dissented. Tainan County Chief Su Huan-chih was among the first to see that something was amiss. He said the DPP party leadership's insistence that the scandal was all about "illegal wiretapping" or "judicial intervention" made Su Tseng-chang "come across as Wang Jin-pyng's defense attorney." He felt the DPP leadership was over-emphasizing "political power struggle," and ignoring the law. Subsequently Green Camp legislator Tuan Yi-kang also warned the DPP. He said that as the largest opposition party, the DPP "must not become Wang Jin-pyng's Praetorian Guard." It must not allow itself to be overwhelmed by Schadenfreude and forget its own crisis. Instead, it must seek political support by upholding the rule of law and democracy. Unfortunately, these voices fell on deaf ears.

Why is the DPP supporting Wang? Is it because it supports Ker and considers supporting Wang part of a "package deal?" Is it gratitude to Wang for his many years of "looking after the DPP" in the Legislative Yuan? Or is it simply a convenient opportunity to demagogue "anti-Ma" sentiment? It is difficult to say, and not worth pursuing. Our concern is the DPP's opportunism. The DPP has long trumpeted its "ethics" and " legitimacy." Yet in order to pillory Ma, it tossed its purported values out the window. Ma Ying-jeou may be behind the curve on many issues. But at least he has demonstrated a sense of justice and determination. By contrast, the DPP made the strategic decision to put opportunism first and self-interest above all, inspiring nothing but contempt.

The DPP has left the public on Taiwan three unanswered questions. One. Suppose Wang Jin-pyng had been peddling influence on behalf of someone other than Ker Chien-ming? Say a Blue Camp legislator? Would the DPP still have spared no effort to support Wang, and accused the Special Investigation Unit of being Ma Ying-jeou's "Enforcers?" Two. Ma Ying-jeou used party disciplinary procedures to deprive Wang Jin-pyng of his position as a legislator, as well as his position as Speaker of the Legislature. Were his actions really inconsistent with the principle of proportionality? If they were, what about the DPP's opportunistic call to impeach President Ma? How consistent was that with the principle of proportionality? Three. During this campaign the DPP and Wang colluded to affirm that "Influence peddling is no crime!" Ker Chien-ming's influence peddling of course, need not be prosecuted either. Meanwhile, the Special Investigation Unit has been fatally demonized. The DPP can now trumpet this as its contribution to Taiwan's democracy and the rule of law.

The DPP went from supporting Wang to pulling down Ma. The DPP's perpetual opportunism has its roots in the party's lack of genuine belief in democracy. When the Blue and Green camps were fighting over the Speaker of the Legislative Yuan years ago, the DPP denounced Wang as "black gold," saying he was the very object of the "black gold investigation center's" investigation. Now however, "Black gold " has magically become its "ally, " and "influence peddling" has become "a value that must be upheld." This shows that the Democratic Progressive Party's sole desire is to "plunge Taiwan into chaos." In this regard, the DPP's crisis of faith is even worse than the KMT's.

The DPP has never known how to act as the "loyal opposition." It has never been loyal to the nation. It has never been loyal to the people. And the events of today show that it is not even loyal to its own professed values of democracy and progress.

挺王變反馬：民進黨的機會主義萬歲
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.09.16 02:08 am

關說案演成政爭，從任何角度看都是台灣的不幸，無論對馬王雙方或一般民眾都是引以為憾的事。唯一對此感到大喜過望的則是民進黨，蘇貞昌立即趁勢吹起「彈劾馬總統」的號角，關說案主角柯建銘更嗆聲要求馬總統道歉自省，一派正義凜然的姿態。

此事演變成今天的模樣，如果關說事件的是非全被遺忘，馬總統和特偵組被妖魔化，關說者繼續笑傲廟堂之上並伸手關說，而國會的政黨政治被一股嶄新的「跨界結合」挾持，我們難以想像台灣政治將變成什麼樣的一池渾水。當正邪的天平如此倒錯，社會又要如何追求正確的價值？

民進黨這次的角色扮演，從敲邊鼓、搧風點火、聲請釋憲、發動倒馬，一路展現它見縫插針的本色。尤其，對於大黨鞭柯建銘在關說案中的角色，民進黨自始至終毫無檢討，更暴露了它膜拜的只是「機會主義」之神，過去自詡「用最高道德標準檢驗自己」的高調已化為灰燼。試想，一個放棄「道德感」與「羞恥心」的民進黨，卻在那裡高喊「程序正義」與「捍衛憲政」，民眾能相信嗎？

根據本報民調，儘管有六成七的民眾認為國民黨對王金平的處分「太重」，但也有四成八的民眾認民進黨應該以「黨紀」處分柯建銘。然而，民進黨對此置若罔聞，也不以為意。游盈隆在「民進黨八年執政研討會」中還說，王金平應該「感謝」陳水扁所受的「苦難」，讓台灣社會對特偵組產生嚴重質疑，才能使王金平在關說案中沒事。如此離奇的「阿扁苦難說」，難道就是民進黨六年來浸淫扁家貪瀆的奇恥大辱，所練就的厚黑神功？

民進黨在關說案中極力「挺王」的脫軌表現，黨內也有少數人抱持不同看法。前台南縣長蘇煥智最早看出不妥，認為黨中央將關說案定調為「非法監聽」或「司法干預」，使得蘇貞昌看起來「像王金平的辯護律師」。他認為，黨中央過度定調「政治鬥爭」，將失卻法律的立場。其後，綠委段宜康也公開提醒，民進黨身為最大反對黨，「不可變成王金平的親衛隊」，更不能見獵心喜到忘了自身危機，而應在維護民主法治上尋取立足點。遺憾的是，這些聲音，全變成狗吠火車。

民進黨之所以全力「挺王」，究竟是因為「挺柯」而「愛烏及屋」，或者是為了感謝王金平多年來在立法院的「愛護」而「知恩圖報」，或者純粹是看中了其間可以操弄的「反馬」巧門，我們無從分斷，也不想細究。我們關切的是，一向無論如何狡辯也要把「道德」及「正當性」掛在嘴邊的民進黨，這次卻為了貪圖一個打馬機會，把它標榜的價值完全拋到九霄雲外。馬英九不識時務的鍘王，至少展現了端正風氣的決心；相形之下，民進黨投機至上、私利為先的策略選擇，只是讓人鄙夷。

事情發展至此，民進黨給台灣社會留下了三個巨大的疑問：第一，如果當初王金平代為關說的對象不是柯建銘，而是任何其他藍營立委，民進黨仍會選擇不遺餘力地挺王，並指控特偵組就是馬英九的「東廠」嗎？第二，如果馬英九用黨紀來剝奪王金平的立委及院長資格是不符比例原則，那麼，民進黨藉機對馬總統發動「彈劾」攻勢，又符合比例原則嗎？第三，經過此役，民進黨和王金平共同形塑的「關說無罪」標準已告確立，柯建銘的關說行為自然不必再予追究，被妖魔化的特偵組則如同點上死穴；那麼，民進黨可以宣稱這就是它對台灣民主與法治的貢獻嗎？

從「挺王」轉向「倒馬」挺進，民進黨這種機會主義萬歲的作風，其實源自於它內在民主信仰的虛空化。當年藍綠爭國會議長寶座時，民進黨將王金平指為「黑金」，說他就是「查黑中心」正在偵查的對象；如今時空丕變，「黑金」變成了「盟友」，「關說」變成了必須捍衛的價值。這也顯示，民進黨的反對黨立場，只剩下「唯恐台灣不亂」的心願。就此而言，民進黨的信仰危機，恐較國民黨有過之而無不及。

民進黨一向不懂如何扮演「忠誠的反對黨」，不知道如何向國家忠誠，向人民忠誠；今天看來，它連維持對自己民主進步信仰的忠誠都放棄了。