Has Ma deviated from the Path of Peaceful Cross-Strait Development?

Has Ma deviated from the Path of Peaceful Cross-Strait Development?
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 27, 2014

Executive Summary: Objectively speaking, the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations is a process that is irreversible. But cross-Strait relations cannot be expected to move forward at high-speed all the way. We are currently in a consolidation phase. As long as the direction does not change, it an begin anew following a smooth adjustment. If cross-Strait relations stagnate or retreat,then problems will emerge one by one. President Ma Ying-jeou has many things he must do. This will not change. He must stay on track. He must lay the foundations for the next leader and overcome all difficulties. He must advance cross-Strait relations on the existing foundation. Then when the time comes, the two sides can begin political dialogue, negotiations, and even discuss a peace agreement, This is President Ma Ying-jeou's true place in history.

Full Text Below:

Xi Jinping spoke to visiting pro-unification groups from Taiwan about "peaceful reunification" and "one country, two systems." Observers at home and abroad offered different interpretations of Xi's remarks. Officials in Taipei have their own preconceptions. They made clear they can never accept such conditions. In President Ma Ying-jeou's Double Ten National Day speech, he spoke of his understanding and support of the Hong Kong people's aspirations for democracy He looked forward to the implementation of democratic constitutionalism on the Mainland, and the chance for some of the Chinese people to enjoy the fruits of democracy. Mainland officials reacted to President Ma's remarks swiftlly and decisively. They said the Taiwan authorities should not make irresponsible remarks. Cross-Strait relations appear to be undergoing subtle changes.

From Taipei's perspective, Ma Ying-jeou was merely stating the obvious. The government on Taiwan certainly has no desire to increase tensions and expand conflicts. But neither does it fear CCP disapproval. Somethings cannot be said. Expressing hope that the Mainland will adopt democracy is not necessarily an accusation that the Mainland is undemocratic. But from Beijing's perspective, the remarks amounted to deliberate provocation and irresponsible meddling. The Ma government later realized that Beijing may have misunderstood his intent, and that they might lead to unnecessary complications. The KMT's Mainland Affairs Director came forward to explain. He reminded the Mainland that Ma Ying-jeou also said the two sides were descendants of China's legendary founders. They are both part of the Chinese people, and should cooperate and seek agreement on their terminology.

In fact, after Xi Jinping met with visitors from Taiwan, Beijing coordinated with important scholars and the Xinhua News Agency. Guo Taiwen of the Taiwan Affairs Office published an article to ensure that everyone understood Xi Jinping's remarks. Beijing stressed that peaceful development is still the guiding policy, along with the pursuit of national unity, opposition to Taiwan separatism, and the realization of the Chinese national unity along with the Chinese Dream. Beijing seeks to bolster pro-reunification sentiment on Taiwan. Such positions are understandable. Simply put, the focus of Xi's remarks was not "one country, two systems," but three considerations, peaceful development, support for reunification, a meeting of the minds, and oppositon to Taiwan independence.

Later, people on the Mainland concluded Ma Ying-jeou was frustrated because the the hoped for Ma Xi meetng in Beijing at this year's APEC conference came to naught. They concluded that Ma was responding to Xi's remarks on September 26. Mainland editorials accused Ma of emotionalism. We do not believe the Ma administration would handle national affairs in such a frivolous manner. We do not believe it would be affected by personal emotions. But only senior government officials can know for sure. What matters is the future of cross-Strait relations, at least for the year and a half remaining in President Ma's second and final term. Where does he intend to go from here? Do the two sides really intend to change their policy and adopt a confrontational approach to their problems?

Consider the matter fron the Mainalnd perspective. President Ma Ying-jeou's Double Ten remarks contained obvious contradictions. He was critical of Taiwan's 3/18 Sunflower Student Movement, yet expressed understanding and support for the protests in Hong Kong. That said, some scholars in Beijing thought that the Mainland authorities' charge that Ma was making irresponsible remarks may have been a tad heavy-handed, After all, if both sides of the Strait are part of one country, then it is entirely reasonable for people on Taiwan to express their views on Hong Kong affairs. These words issued directly from the lips of President Ma. Had they issued from the MAC, the Mainland might not have responded so vehemently. The Mainland side is quite accomodating towards the Ma Ying-jeou government.

Beijing is concerned that in response to the abortive Ma Xi meeting, the Ma Ying-jeou government might turn to the international community, the United States, and Japan. Beijing is concerned that Ma might express a willingness to cooperate with them In the East China Sea and South China Sea. Taipei wants greater participation in regional economic organizations such as the RCEP and TPP. It hopes to increase the Taiwan's international space. Recent rumors about the Dalai Lama visiting Taiwan will only increase Beijing's suspicions. Regarding Taiwan's international space, Beijing has consistently adopted a reactive posture. Peaceful development and Taiwan's international space tend to move in step with each other. Cross-Strait relations are not a panacea. But absent stable cross-Strait relations, nothing is possible. A confrontational approach will only leave Taiwan at a disadvantage. Taiwan cannot afford to be reckless.

If our understanding is correct, Beijing's Taiwan policy can be summarized as follows: Consolidate existing achievements. Improve bilateral relations. Take the initiative. Seize every opportunity. Control the rhythm. Wait for breakthroughs. The Wang Zhang meeting was the first official contact between the two sides. It was of historic importance. The Wang Zhang meeting allowed the CCP to reclaim the strategic initiative, making cross-Strait relations sustainable. Now consider the issues to be discussed at the third Wang Zhang meeting, at APEC in November. Consider the year and a half remaining in Ma's term. The two sides must get things done. Only that has any meaning. The Taipei side in particular, must make careful plans. If the meeting is reduced to pro forma ritual, it won't mean a thing.

Objectively speaking, the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations is a process that is irreversible. But cross-Strait relations cannot be expected to move forward at high-speed all the way. We are currently in a consolidation phase. As long as the direction does not change, it an begin anew following a smooth adjustment. If cross-Strait relations stagnate or retreat,then problems will emerge one by one. President Ma Ying-jeou has many things he must do. This will not change. He must stay on track. He must lay the foundations for the next leader and overcome all difficulties. He must advance cross-Strait relations on the existing foundation. Then when the time comes, the two sides can begin political dialogue, negotiations, and even discuss a peace agreement, This is President Ma Ying-jeou's true place in history.

社論－馬偏離兩岸和平發展路線嗎？
2014年10月27日 04:09
本報訊

習近平對台灣統派團體發表「和平統一、一國兩制」談話後，海內外各有解讀，台北官方似乎也有定見，表明絕不接受的立場，接著馬英九總統在雙十國慶講話中，提到對香港民眾爭取民主的理解與支持，並表示期待中國大陸實施民主憲政，讓一部分中國人先民主起來。中共官方對馬總統的談話作出迅速、明快的批判，強調台灣不該對此隨便說三道四。兩岸關係看來似乎正在發生微妙的變化。

從台灣的角度來看，馬英九是為所當為、言所當言，台灣政府固然不想增加緊張、擴大矛盾，但也不必因為擔心中共的不滿，而有話不敢說或不能說，期許大陸民主並不等於批評大陸不民主。但從北京角度來看，恐怕是蓄意挑釁，說三道四，指手畫腳。後來馬政府或許警覺到，北京如果做出錯誤解讀，會產生不必要的後遺症，由國民黨大陸事務部主任出面撰文，強調大陸應該多加體會馬英九談話中有關炎黃子孫、中華民族、攜手合作、共同探索的用語等等。

其實，在習總書記會見台灣訪賓之後，北京也曾經透過部分重要學者及新華社發表署名評論文章，郭台文署名乃國台辦文章的諧音，希望全面解釋習近平相關談話的旨意。北京強調和平發展仍是政策主軸，追求國家統一，反對台灣分離主義，要將國家統一與中國夢的實現結合起來，北京想要採取有效方式，壯大台灣主張統一的聲音與力量，這些都是可以理解的基本立場。簡單的說，習的談話重點不在一國兩制，而在三個照顧，和平發展，支持統派，心靈契合及反對台獨。

事後，大陸內部一般認為，或許因為台北力推在今年北京亞太經合會上馬、習二人會面的計畫受挫，所以馬英九的講話有點情緒性的宣泄，是對習近平926談話的間接回應，也有陸媒撰文批評馬流於情緒。我們雖認為政府當局對國家大事不會如此兒戲，不會因為個人的情緒而受影響，但對與不對只有政府高層心中有數，如今問題的重點在於兩岸關係將來，或至少在未來一年半馬總統的剩餘任期裡，究竟要何去何從，雙方難道真是要改採針鋒相對的對抗方式來處理問題嗎？

若從中國大陸的角度來看，馬英九總統雙十談話中的某些立場有明顯的矛盾，他一方面反對、批判台灣的318太陽花運動，但為何卻又表示理解、支持香港的抗爭活動。不過即或如此，北京仍有學者認為，大陸指斥台北不宜說三道四的談話太過直接，而且太重了一些，因為兩岸既是一國，台灣發表一些對香港事務的看法也還在情理之中。但如果不是由馬總統親自說出這些話，而僅由陸委會講講，大陸方面應不會如此強烈反彈。大陸各方對馬英九政府還是存有相當的包容。

如今，北京擔心馬、習會受挫之後，馬英九政府有轉向國際的可能，主動對美國、日本示好，在東海、南海，台灣參與區域經濟組織（RCEP及TPP）等問題上更加積極，試圖自行推動擴大台灣國際空間，而最近有關達賴訪台的傳聞更會增加北京的猜忌。對台灣的國際空間問題來說，北京還是一貫採取被動原則及個案處理方式，而和平發展與台灣的國際空間是連動的，兩岸關係不是萬能，但沒有兩岸關係則萬萬不能。如果採取對抗的方式，台灣絕對處於劣勢，不可不慎。

如果我們的理解正確，北京當前的對台政策應可歸納為，不斷鞏固現有成果，持續深化雙邊關係，掌握主動，把握機遇，控制節奏，俟機突破。據此，如果說王、張一會是兩岸主管官署的首度接觸，具有歷史意義；王、張二會則是讓中共取回了戰略主動，使兩岸關係能夠持續下去；如今則應好好想想今年11月APEC王、張三會的相關議題，看看未來一年半馬的剩餘任期中，雙方還能把那些事情做好，這才有意義，台北方面尤其不妨仔細思考規畫，如果只是一個過場的儀式性見面就沒啥意思了。

客觀來看，兩岸和平發展態勢不可逆轉，但兩岸關係終究不可能一路高速前進發展，目前應該是進入了盤整時期，只要方向不變，平穩調整之後再行出發並無不可。兩岸關係如果停滯不進將有倒退之虞，問題會逐一浮現出來，而馬英九總統今日應作應為之事不是改弦易轍，而是在既定的軌道上，努力為下一位領導人打下基礎，排除困難，讓其能夠在已有的基礎上，更進一步發展兩岸關係，屆時雙方將可以逐步進入政治對話、談判，甚至討論和平協議，而這才是馬英九總統真正的歷史定位之所在。