The Republic of China: A Force for Cohesion

The Republic of China: A Force for Cohesion
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 9, 2014

Summary: The Republic of China has become a banner increasingly able to inspire the public. Its significance must be broadened and deepened. It must be made more forward-looking, developmentally oriented, future-oriented, rather than narrow, self-demeaning, and inflexible. The ROC has powerful justifications for its existence. The "National Unification Guidelines" includes such justifications and principles. It also includes a comprehensive process. It deserves greater consideration. It deserves to be updated and enriched.

Full Text Below:

Taiwan independence can become a form of religious faith. Opposition to Taiwan independence, on the other hand, cannot become a religious faith. In which case, how should non-Taiwan independence forces formulate their ideals and generate cohesion?

Chen Chang-wen, an attorney at law, wrote an editorial for the China Times. In a clear and straightforward manner he said, "Taiwan independence is a religious faith. But opposition to Taiwan independence cannot become a form of religious faith. Instead, it is a repudiation of faith, one that lacks a firm center." Chen Chang-wen thinks that "Such a repudiation of faith is rooted in fear. Fear will only make people flee. It cannot inspire them to embrace something from within themselves." This is the key reason why non-Taiwan independence forces on Taiwan gradually began losing their idealism and momentum beginning in 2008. This is the key reason why Taiwan independence has gotten stronger day by day.

The Sunflower Student Movement forced Ma Ying-jeou to promote party reforms. Many people are wondering just what are the KMT's ideals and beliefs? Chen Chang-wen argued that opposition to Taiwan independence cannot become a form of religious faith. Jaw Shao-kang said "The raison d'etre for the KMT cannot be merely to oppose Taiwan independence, or enable cynical politicians to fulfill their person ambitions. If the KMT cannot come to that realization, then it has lost touch with its ideals. How then can it appeal to the people and touch people's hearts?" Jaw said, "The KMT must reclaim its ideals. Only ideals can attract young people. Only ideals can give the party hope."

Taiwan independence for some people is indeed a kind of religious faith. It does indeed wield a certain kind of power over them. This "ideal" may look pretty on the outside. But that is an illusion. It will eventually lead to destruction. It lacks a solid foundation. It lacks a real future. The question is, apart from opposition to Taiwan-independence, what choice does Taiwan have? Which political party, the KMT, the PFP, or the New Party, has offered such a choice?

Ma Ying-jeou has proposed and practiced a policy of "no re-unification, no Taiwan independence, and no use of force." This may be the way he positions Taiwan during the next two years. After 2008, brushfires broke out repeatedly in the Taiwan Strait. Cross-Strait tensions increased. "No reunification, no Taiwan independence, no use of force" was a position that most people could depend on for the time being. It represented the preservation of the status quo. It meant that the orderly lives of ordinary people would not be disrupted. But it was hardly a bold position. It could hardly inspire people, and lead them forward. As Chen Chang-wen said, It had a powerful odor of "passivity and longing for safety."

Consider the current international and cross-strait situation. "No reunification, no Taiwan independence, no use of force" is already lagging behind. It cannot unite the people. It cannot lead Taiwan. Taiwan intelligentsia must do more than merely oppose Taiwan independence. They must offer a new practical vision not divorced from reality. A new political vision cannot emerge out of nowhere. It must have a solid foundation, rooted in reality. This solid foundation is the Republic of China.

The Republic of China has a multitude of virtues. It boasts legitimacy, practicality, development potential, and attractiveness.

One. After undergoing democratic transition on Taiwan, the Republic of China ceased being a "foreign regime" or "government in exile." After democratic reforms and numerous elections, the ROC has been thoroughly updated. It boasts a solid foundation that can ensure stability and prosperity for Taiwan.

Two. The Republic of China is a practical option. It offers a stark contrast to the reckless adventurism of Taiwan independence. Even mainstream Green Camp leaders have shifted in the direction of the Republic of China. The Republic of China has become the practical option in Blue vs. Green and reunification vs. independence controversies. It has become the common denominator in the minds of the people.

Three. The Mainland authorities once perceived the ROC as "past history." But with the peaceful development of cross-strait relations, the Mainland authorities are increasingly willing to recognize the Republic of China. The Mainland constitution has ironically become a pillar of strength for cross-Strait relations.

Four. The banner of the republic remains a valuable asset in the development of cross-strait peace, and a valuable legacy for the Republic of China. This may be the result of historical nostalgia, of the Republic of China's rich and diverse culture, of the vitality of its civil society, or of memories of the era's constitutional thought. Whatever the reason, it continues to hold considerable appeal for the people on the Mainland,

For a long time the Mainland authorities repudiated the ROC, or at least avoided acknowledging its existence. But more and more, Mainland scholars are "emancipating their thinking" about Taiwan. National Society of Taiwan Studies Executive Vice President and Secretary General Zhou Zhihuai said "When it comes to reasonable arrangements, (in cross-strait political relations) more imaginative solutions can be found." Peking University Taiwan Research Institute president Li Yihu said we should adopt a "keep what we have unchanged, whatever is added can be reformed" approach. What the two sides have is declarations that their own sovereignty includes the other's constitution. In other words, "one China, two constitutions," means that "one China" and "two constitutions" can coexist.

This means the ROC's "one China framework" is not "past tense." On the contrary, it offers new opportunities and vitality. It can become a stabilizing and constructive force in cross-Strait relations. It can inspire people and bolster their political convictions.

The Republic of China has become a banner increasingly able to inspire the public. Its significance must be broadened and deepened. It must be made more forward-looking, developmentally oriented, future-oriented, rather than narrow, self-demeaning, and inflexible. The ROC has powerful justifications for its existence. The "National Unification Guidelines" includes such justifications and principles. It also includes a comprehensive process. It deserves greater consideration. It deserves to be updated and enriched.

社論－讓中華民國成為凝聚的力量
2014年05月09日 04:09 中國時報 編輯部

太陽花學運被認為與台獨畫上等號。圖為學運人員10日凌晨在議場內拆卸海報標語。（本報系資料照片）
　太陽花學運被認為與台獨畫上等號。圖為學運人員10日凌晨在議場內拆卸海報標語。（本報系資料照片）

如果台獨可以成為信仰，反台獨不能成為信仰，那麼，非台獨力量要如何創造理想、凝聚團結呢？

陳長文律師在《中國時報》發表專欄，直白而清晰地表示，「台獨是信仰，反台獨卻不構成信仰。反，是一種中心不定的否定」。陳長文認為，「這樣的反，力量懸於恐懼，恐懼只能讓人逃避，並不能從內我中形成擁抱的力量」。這是台灣非台獨力量自2008年後逐漸失去理想與動能，台獨力量卻日益彰顯的關鍵原因。

太陽花學運迫使馬英九必須推動黨務改革，許多人心中也浮現疑問，國民黨的理想與信仰究竟是什麼？陳長文提出「『反台獨』不能成為信仰」的大哉問，趙少康則說：「國民黨存在的目的絕不應該只是反對台獨，或只是讓一些現實政客遂其私人野心，如果國民黨想不通這一點，失去理想性，又怎麼能夠號召群眾、振奮人心？」他還說：「國民黨要找回理想性，有理想才能吸引年輕人，這個黨才有希望」。

台獨，確實是一些人的信仰，也產生了某種力量，只是，這種「理想」看似美好，卻始於虛幻，終於破壞，缺乏紮實的根基，沒有真正的未來。問題在於，在「反台獨」之外，台灣真正的選擇是什麼？國民黨、親民黨或新黨，哪個政黨能提出，或提供這樣的選擇。

馬英九曾經提出，也正在實踐，也許未來兩年仍將持續的台灣定位論述，就是「不統、不獨、不武」。2008年前後，台海政治烽火不斷，兩岸關係緊張，「不統、不獨、不武」是多數老百姓暫時可以依靠、信賴的選擇，因為這代表了現狀的維持，代表了庶民的生活秩序不會被動搖。然而，這畢竟不是一種積極的選擇，不是足以號召人心、帶領民眾前進，誠如陳長文所說，這有著濃厚的「偏安的消極性」。

就當前的國際和兩岸形勢看來，「不統、不獨、不武」已落後於形勢，也不足以凝聚人心、帶領台灣。在「反台獨」之外，台灣有識之士必須提出新的、既不脫離現實又切實可行的願景。當然，任何新的政治願景與論述，不可能憑空產生，總得在現實的土壤中有著深厚的基礎，而這個土壤、這個基礎就是中華民國。

事實上，中華民國的正當性、務實性、發展性和吸引力都充分具備。首先，在台灣民主轉型之後，中華民國之於台灣，絕對不再是某些人所說的「外來政權」、「流亡政權」，相反的，歷經民主改革和多次選舉，中華民國體制不斷自我修補調整，已為台灣長久的安定繁榮扎下了深厚的基礎。其次，中華民國的務實穩健，與台獨的急進冒險形成鮮明的對比，連綠營的主流立場都只能往中華民國靠攏趨同。中華民國在藍綠政治、統獨爭議之中，越來越成為務實的選擇，成為民眾心中的最大公約數。

第三，中華民國本來已被大陸當局視為「歷史」，但是，兩岸關係進入和平發展期後，大陸當局愈來愈體認中華民國及其憲法已微妙的成為穩定兩岸關係的力量與支柱。

第四，事實上，「民國」這面旗幟，不管是因為對歷史的懷舊、對民國時期文化豐富多元、民間社會生機澎湃的想望，或是對當時憲政思潮的追想，在大陸民間仍具有相當的吸引力，這絕對是兩岸和平發展及中華民國的寶貴資產。

當然，長期以來，大陸當局對於中華民國是否定的，至少是迴避的，但「解放思想」越來越是大陸涉台學者的主張與期待，全國台灣研究會執行副會長兼祕書長周志懷表示，「在（兩岸政治關係）合情合理安排問題上可以發揮更大的想像力」。北京大學台灣研究院李義虎院長也提出：兩岸關係應該秉持「存量不變、增量改革」的構想，所謂兩岸的「存量」就是兩岸宣示主權均包括對方的「兩憲」，即「一中兩憲」，亦即「一中」與「兩憲」並存。

沿著這樣的思路，在一中架構下的中華民國，就不僅不是「過去式」，反而煥發新的機會與生命力，它將能成為兩岸關係中一個穩定的、建設性的力量，成為越來越能號召人心、凝聚力量的「政治信仰」。

當然，中華民國要成為更有號召力量的旗幟，還需要拓寬、加深它的意涵，讓他更有前瞻性、發展性、未來性，而不是被窄化、矮化、僵固化。所以，中華民國需要「配套論述」，例如，《國統綱領》就是有目標、有原則、有進程的完整論述，是值得被重新考慮、調整並使之更為豐富。