Cross-Strait Relations: Advancement or Stagnation?

Cross-Strait Relations: Advancement or Stagnation?
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 26, 2014

Executive Summary: Voters must ask themselves a tough question. They may be dissatisfied with the status quo. They may be dissatisfied with the KMT. But will the KMT's defeat punish the KMT? Or will it punish themselves? Whether a particular party wins or loses is not worth that much ink. But this election will determine whether Taipei and Beijing sail into an open sea. or wind up trapped in a blind alley.

Full Text Below:

Attorney Chen Chang-wen recently published an article predicting that if the KMT loses the nine in one elections, the results will be seen as a rejection of President Ma and the KMT's cross-Strait economic policy. The STA is already stalled. The MTA and FEPZ special regulations remain hopelessly deadlocked. Chen raised a key question. This election is characterized as a local election. But its impact is definitely more than local. This election may determine whether cross-Strait relations continues down Ma’s path of peaceful development, or reverts to Chen Shui-bian's path of endless confrontation.

Voters may not realize that this election will have a major impact on the path of national development. But if the KMT is defeated in the nine in one elections, it is almost certain that the cross-Strait reconciliation and improved relations that Ma championed for the last six and a half years will be weakened or even reversed. The ruling party’s election prospects are not good. Is the public psychologically prepared to accept a reversal of cross-Strait policy?

The impact of such a major reversal is likely to be more significant than who becomes the mayor or county chief of various cities. Therefore when voters cast their ballots for their preferred candidates, how can they refuse to consider the impact on the nation as a whole? The PRC-ROK FTA is about to go into effect. Taiwan's economy may not have sounded its death knell. But is surely has sounded its economic tsunami alarm.

We face a difficult situation, yet we are regaled with irresponsible comments. Huang Kuo-chang argues that cross-Strait agreements are not ordinary FTAs. He says their political purpose is all too clear. He says the people must be on guard. He says the Ma government wants to use the PRC-ROK FTA to blackmail the people into signing the STA and MTA, as soon as possible. Wang Tu-fat argues that Korean products surpassed Taiwan products in Mainland market share long ago. He said that even if flat panels and plastics tax rates are impacted, the real key is industry research and development, innovation, and product differentiation. He says people should not be intimidated by the FTA.

Huang and Wang should not be so cavalier. They should not dismiss or even vilify the government's response. If they wish to oppose the STA and MTA, they are free to do so. But they should at least be responsible enough to warn people about the consequences. They should inform the Sunflower Student Movement youth who took to the streets because they believed what they said. Taiwan faces increasing marginalization on the world economic stage. If we reject Ma Ying-jeou’s peaceful development roadmap, and revert to Chen Shui-bian’s path of confrontation and evasion, will that help Taiwan survive? These two men are encouraging the destruction of current policy. But can they offer any constructive alternative that will help Taiwan out of its dilemma?

Please do not recite the same old mantra, "Innovation and differentiation are the real key." People on Taiwan are working hard to innovate and differentiate. Do they really think other countries are oblivious to the need for innovation and differentiation? Before businesses can innovate and differentiate, they must have capital. Korea and Taiwan are in a race. Taiwan is burdened with tariffs. Korea is not. Taiwan companies will not simply lose sales to Korea. Taiwan companies will also see smaller corporate profits. Smaller profits will hamper their ability to innovate.

Huang Kuo-chang Wang Tu-fat can pretend not to understand any of this. Pretending will not affect their salaries. Pretending will not affect their standing in society. The two may even be crowned with garlands and be cheered by Sunflower Student Movement youth. But the public on Taiwan, especially the younger generation, cannot pretend not to understand.

As soon as agreement on the PRC-ROK FTA was reached, the DPP’s attitude toward the STA changed completely. The DPP went all out to block the STA in the legislature. Now however, it stopped claiming credit for blocking the STA. Now it blamed President Ma for a “failure to communicate.” The DPP made a 180 degree about face. What we would like to know is, where are all those who insisted that "opposition to the STA is the will of the majority” currently hiding?

President Ma’s momentum may be in the doldrums. But his cross-Strait policy, including the diplomatic truce and the 1992 consensus were affirmed in two presidential elections. Lest we forget, on the eve of the 3/18 student movement, a poll commissioned by the DPP revealed that the KMT's cross-Strait policy was more popular than the DPP’s. The poll revealed that the most unpopular aspect of the DPP’s cross-Strait policy was its blanket rejection of anything to do with Mainland China.

That was why following the DPP’s defeat in 2008, it conducted a cross-Strait policy review. That was why in 2012, it released a rare poll that showed the public disapproved of its cross-Strait policy. Clearly the pressure of public opinion forced the DPP to change its cross-Strait policy, making it more similar to the Kuomintang’s. It was already becoming almost indistinguishable.

If however the DPP makes a comeback during this election, green camp fundamentalists will inevitably rise to prominence. The Ma government will no longer have the political prestige necessary to promote cross-Strait exchanges. That is certain. The warm spring the two sides have enjoyed the past six and a half years will turn to a bitter winter.

Voters must ask themselves a tough question. They may be dissatisfied with the status quo. They may be dissatisfied with the KMT. But will the KMT's defeat punish the KMT? Or will it punish themselves?

Whether a particular party wins or loses is not worth that much ink. But this election will determine whether Taipei and Beijing sail into an open sea. or wind up trapped in a blind alley.

社論－兩岸關係前進或停滯的選擇
2014年11月26日 04:10
本報訊

陳長文律師日前發表文章表示，九合一選舉，若國民黨失敗，將被解讀為馬總統與國民黨的兩岸路線與經濟政策的否決，已經卡關的服貿、貨貿與自由經濟示範區條例更無望過關。他提出了一個核心問題：這一場名為「地方」的選舉，其結果與影響，絕對不只是「地方的」。換言之，這場選舉在某種程度上，將具有決定兩岸關係要繼續馬英九的和平發展路線抑或回到陳水扁的對抗逃避路線的指標意義。

也就是說，不管選民有沒有意識到這場選舉對國家發展路線的重大影響，一旦國民黨在九合一大敗，幾乎可以斷言，這將是過去6年半馬英九堅持的兩岸和解、深化交流的大挫敗，甚至可能引發兩岸政策的逆轉效應，在執政黨選情陷入低迷的此時，要問的是，國人做好心理準備，接受兩岸發展的大逆轉了嗎？

這個大逆轉帶給台灣的衝擊，甚至比個別城市由誰當首長還重大，由此反推，選民在投票「選人」的時候，豈能不去思考國家大局可能連動的影響？特別是，在中韓FTA即將生效的此時，台灣的經濟就算不必視為「喪鐘」，也必須視為經濟海嘯來襲的「警鐘」！

面對這即將到來的困難局面，我們仍看到許多不負責任的意見。黃國昌說，兩岸協議非單純的FTA，其背後政治目的昭然若揭，須提防馬政府以中、韓FTA進度，要脅國人盡速與對岸簽訂服貿與貨貿協議。王塗發則表示，在大陸市場裡韓國產品市占率早就超過台灣，即使面板、塑化有稅率影響，業者研發創新力與產品差異化才是關鍵，不應拿FTA恐嚇人民。

黃、王不應該用這種輕描淡寫的口吻，去淡化甚至醜化政府提出的應對作為，反對服貿與貨貿沒關係，但至少應該負責任的告訴人民、告訴那些因為相信二人理論而走上街頭的太陽花青年，面對台灣在世界經濟舞台愈來愈邊緣化的險境，否決了馬英九的和平發展路線後，難道回到陳水扁的對抗逃避路線，台灣會更有生機嗎？二人在鼓勵破壞衝撞現有政策後，二人有什麼建設性的辦法，助台灣走出困境？

別再說什麼「創新與差異化才是關鍵」的敷衍話。台灣努力想創新與差異化，難道別的國家不懂創新與差異化？問題是，企業要創新與差異化也必須有資本，免揹關稅沙包的韓國和揹著關稅沙包的台灣在賽跑，台灣不只會因為揹沙包而賣產品賣不過別人，賣東西賣不過別人也將影響企業獲利，而減少其投入創新的能力，這意謂台灣企業在創新上也比對手多揹了一袋沙包在拚搏。

這些道理，黃國昌與王塗發可以假裝不懂，這既不影響他們的收入，也不影響二人的社會地位，甚至還因此可以戴上英雄的冠冕，接受太陽花青年的歡呼。但台灣人民，特別是年輕一代的朋友不可以不懂。

另一個值得注意的現象是，自中韓FTA傳出達成共識之後，民進黨對於服貿的態度完全轉變。卯足全力在立法院封殺服貿的民進黨，現在不再把封殺服貿攬為民進黨的「功勞」，大手一推，變成是馬總統「溝通不足」的責任，這種一百八十度的轉變，要問的是，之前說「反服貿是多數民意」的人躲到哪裡去了呢？

即便馬總統現在聲勢低迷，但是他所推動的兩岸政策，包括外交休兵、九二共識，的的確確得到了兩次總統大選的肯定。別忘了，就在318學運前夕，民進黨發布的民調還表示國民黨的兩岸政策認同度超過民進黨，而民進黨兩岸政策最不被接受之處，就是「逢中必反」。

也因此，民進黨在2008年敗選之後，已對兩岸政策做了檢討，2012年後更罕見的釋放出自己兩岸政策不得人民認同的民調，可見在民意的壓力之下，民進黨的兩岸政策向國民黨靠攏，本已差臨門一腳。

但如果這次選舉的結果翻盤，則綠營的基本教義派必然抬頭，馬政府也再無政治威信推動任何兩岸交流，可預期的，兩岸也將從過去6年半的暖春走入不知邊界的寒冬。

此時此刻，選民必須自問的是，或許，大家對現狀有不滿、對國民黨有不滿，但國民黨的敗選，是在懲罰國民黨，還是懲罰自己？

一黨之勝負或無足論，但這一場選舉，我們也將同時決定，兩岸未來是要繼續向藍海展航還是封進布滿冰棘的死胡同？