DPP: From the Nation’s Adversary to the Nation’s Defender

DPP: From the Nation’s Adversary to the Nation’s Defender
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 5, 2014

Executive Summary: Wen-Je Ko said, "The Republic of China is the bottom line." Tsai Ing-wen and many DPP leaders have said something similar. But they usually mean that the name "Republic of China," is all that remains of the Republic of China. We hope that during the upcoming 2016 presidential election, the DPP will hold aloft the red, white, and blue ROC flag, and show its support for a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan." An "ROC that includes the DPP" is the DPP's way out. It is also Taiwan’s way out.

Full Text Below: 

Wen-Je Ko said, "The Republic of China is the bottom line." Tsai Ing-wen and many DPP leaders have said something similar. But they usually mean that the name "Republic of China," is all that remains of the Republic of China.

Tsai Ing-wen said that her “Republic of China” includes Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. It includes the Tamsui River and the Cho Shui Creek. She said that Ma Ying-jeou’s Republic of China, on the other hand, includes the Yangtze River, Yellow River, and Heilongjiang River. Chen Shui-bian wanted to rewrite the history textbooks. He wanted to make Chinese history part of foreign history, and redefine Sun Yat-sen as a foreigner. Such a "Republic of China," that would excise Sun Yat-sen and the Yangtze River, yet retain the name "Republic of China," is nothing more than "backdoor listing."

Taiwan independence theory initially repudiated the ROC. It referred to the Republic of China as a "foreign government." Its goal was to "found a Republic of Taiwan." But global conditions changed. Taiwan independence advocates began to argue that "Taiwan is a sovereign country. Its current name is the Republic of China." That is what is known as "backdoor listing."

This change in Taiwan independence strategy was understandable. Taiwan independence advocates initially hoped to found a Republic of Taiwan and overthrow the Republic of China, severing all connection with "China." They assumed this would prevent annexation by the People's Republic of China. But global developments showed that the “rectification of names and the authoring of a new constitution” would put Taiwan in danger. They realized that the "Republic of China" provided a strategic barrier for Taiwan. So they reverted to the term "Republic of China," but adopted a "backdoor listing" strategy. This is what they mean when they say "The ROC is the bottom line." Therefore when the DPP, which purports to defend the ROC, holds political rallies, not a single ROC flag can be seen.

Taiwan independence theory defines the relationship between "Taiwan" and the "Republic of China" in "four stages." Stage 1. The Republic of China is on the Mainland. Stage 2. The Republic of China arrives on Taiwan. Stage 3. The Republic of China is on Taiwan. Stage 4. The Republic of China is Taiwan. Stage 4 is Tsai Ing-wen’s so-called "The Republic of China is Taiwan, and Taiwan is the Republic of China." That is "backdoor listing." That is "the ROC that does not include the Yangtze River or the Yellow River."

The DPP's concept of national identity and constitutional allegiance contain a major contradiction. Why? Because "one China, different interpretations" is the cross-Strait bottom line. This bottom line is based on a "Republic of China that includes both the Yangtze River and the Cho Shui Creek.” But Tsai Ing-wen says "the Republic of China includes only the Tamsui River, not the Yellow River." She rejects "one China, different interpretations." As a result, the DPP rejects the "1992 consensus." It says there is no "1992 consensus." Therefore there is no "one China, different interpretations."

The DPP’s political and economic policy path has four pillars. One. Reject the 1992 consensus. Two. Retain the Taiwan independence party platform. Do not freeze it. Three. Argue that the Republic of China is Taiwan, and Taiwan is the Republic of China. Four. Connect with the rest of the world before connecting with Mainland China. These four pillars are erected on the strategic concept of "backdoor listing." But it leaves the DPP no way out.

If the DPP hopes for a breakthrough in its political and economic policy path, it must reject its "Republic of China is Taiwan" rhetoric and embrace a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan" stance. 

Under a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan" framework, the Republic of China dates back to 1911. It upholds "one China, different interpretations." It is moving towards a "big roof concept of China." It even incorporates the DPP’s post-1949 "Taiwan elements" as value-added changes to the ROC. This means the DPP need not remain outside the "Republic of China." It need not see the ROC as the "KMT’s Republic of China." The DPP can accept a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan." Once it does, then the ROC Constitution, which includes the Yangtze River, no longer presents a problem, but becomes Taiwan's political firewall. If the DPP embraces a "ROC that includes Taiwan," it will surely strengthen the "one China, different interpretations" premise.

To reconstruct the peoples’ national identity, the DPP must change its own role. The DPP should embrace a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan." It should see the "Republic of China that includes the DPP" as a proud accomplishment. It should no longer see itself as something “other” than the Republic of China. It should no longer see itself as a “foreign body.” Sixty years of history have “included Taiwan" in the Republic of China. The DPP's contributions have made it part of the Republic of China. The DPP should therefore see itself as benefactors of the Republic of China, as reformers of the Republic of China. It should cease trying to jettison the ROC. It should cease trying to remain outside the Republic of China. It should go from being the Republic of China's "adversaries" to being its defenders. This is how the DPP can change its self-assigned role for the better.

We hope that during the upcoming 2016 presidential election, the DPP will hold aloft the red, white, and blue ROC flag, and show its support for a "Republic of China that includes Taiwan." An "ROC that includes the DPP" is the DPP's way out. It is also Taiwan’s way out.

民進黨：由國家敵對者 轉變為承當者
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.12.05 02:32 am

柯文哲說：「中華民國是底線。」蔡英文及許多民進黨人也說過類似的話。當他們這麼說的時候，有時是指「中華民國」只剩「中華民國」四個字。

蔡英文曾稱，她所說的中華民國，指的就是台澎金馬，包括淡水河、濁水溪；而馬英九說的中華民國，卻是包括長江、黃河、黑龍江。陳水扁也曾想改編歷史教科書，將「中國史」列入「外國史」，將孫中山改成「外國人」。這樣的「中華民國」，切割了孫中山與長江，雖然保留了「中華民國」四個字，卻是「借殼上市」。

台獨理論原來是根本否定中華民國的，指中華民國為「外來政權」，而以「建立台灣共和國」為宗旨；但隨著世局與國情的推移變化，台獨理論漸漸轉向「台灣是一個（主權獨立的）國家，他（現在）的名字叫做中華民國」。此即「借殼上市」。

台獨的戰略變革是可以理解的。原本認為，建立台灣共和國，推翻了中華民國，切斷了與「中國」的關係，即可防制中華人民共和國的併吞。但世局與國情的發展顯示，正名制憲將使台灣陷於凶險，「中華民國」反而是台灣的戰略屏障，於是又回到「中華民國」，但採「借殼上市」之策，亦即「以中華民國為底線」。因此，口喊中華民國的民進黨，在政治集會中看不到一面國旗。

「台灣」與「中華民國」的關係，台獨理論曾有「四階段說」。一、中華民國在大陸；二、中華民國到台灣；三、中華民國在台灣；四、中華民國是台灣。其中的第四階段，就是蔡英文所說的「中華民國是台灣／台灣是中華民國」，即是「借殼上市」，也就是「沒有長江、黃河的中華民國」。

這使得民進黨的國家認同與憲法論述陷於重大矛盾。因為，「一中各表」是兩岸的「底線」，而此一底線建立在「有長江，也有濁水溪的中華民國」之上；但蔡英文所稱「只有淡水河，沒有黃河的中華民國」，拒絕了「一中各表」。因此，民進黨否定「九二共識」；而沒有「九二共識」，即無「一中各表」。

民進黨的國家政經總路線有四大支柱：一、否定九二共識。二、不廢凍台獨黨綱。三、中華民國是台灣，台灣是中華民國。四、從世界走向中國。這四大支柱皆是建立在「借殼上市」的戰略構想之上，但這也使民進黨必無出路。

民進黨若欲在政經總路線上有所突破，必須從「中華民國是台灣」，朝向「中華民國加台灣」移動。

在「中華民國加台灣」的架構下，一方面以一九一一年以來的中華民國，來維持「一中各表」，推向「大屋頂中國」；另一方面，將一九四九年以後包括民進黨在內的「台灣元素」視為中華民國的加值與轉型。是則，民進黨即不必自外於這個「中華民國」，更無需再將這個中華民國視為「國民黨的中華民國」。當民進黨接受了「中華民國加台灣」，即能感知：對台灣而言，中華民國憲法法理上存在的長江，不是禍水，反而是台灣的政治天險。而民進黨若改持「中華民國加台灣」，亦必增加了「一中各表」的力度。

若要重建全民的國家認同，必須從改變民進黨的自我角色認同作起。民進黨倘能在「中華民國加台灣」之中，領悟到「中華民國加民進黨」的成就感，即不必再自視為中華民國的「他者」或「敵體」。因為，在這個經歷了六十餘年「加台灣」的過程中，中華民國確已加入了民進黨的貢獻與努力，因而民進黨應當自視為中華民國的加益者、改造者與承當者，勿再試圖拋棄中華民國，亦勿再自外於中華民國。由中華民國的「敵對者」轉為「承當者」，這就是民進黨自我角色認同的正向改變。

希望在接下來的二○一六總統大選中，民進黨能夠以擎持青天白日滿地紅的國旗，來展現「中華民國加台灣」與「中華民國加民進黨」的新形象。這是民進黨的生路，也是台灣的出路。