Improved Cross-Strait Relations Brings Opportunities

Improved Cross-Strait Relations Brings Opportunities
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, China)
A Translation
January 9, 2015

Executive Summary: The Mainland is actively discussing cross-Strait policy. The blue and green parties lag behind. Both sides face a new situation. Three way red, blue, and green dialogue and consensus is all the more essential. Only this can ensure the long term peaceful development of cross-Strait relations.

Full Text Below:

What will happen to cross-Strait relations in the wake of the Sunflower Student Movement and the nine in one elections? That is a question many people are asking. Some form of National Affairs Conference in the first half of this year seems like a foregone conclusion. Cross-Strait relations is an important issue. Given the upcoming presidential election, cross-Strait relations is something neither the DPP nor the KMT can avoid. The Mainland faces a changing situation on Taiwan. It too must consider how to respond. One might say that a "cross-Strait new normal" is taking shape over the Taiwan Strait.

The "cross-Strait new normal" began on February 25. CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping met with KMT Honorary Chairman Lien Chan. Together they announced the "Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation and the China Dream" as a common point of departure. They included the "Both sides of the Strait are one family" thesis. This was perhaps the most important thesis on cross-Strait relations since Xi came to power. Zhang Nianchi, a veteran Taiwan expert from the Mainland, said the “national unity” currently advocated by the Mainland authorities is very different from past conceptions of national unity. It has morphed from conquest to "peaceful reintegration." This fundamentally alters Taiwan's status from "being reunified" to something else entirely. Several times during his speech, Xi Jinping referred to this sort of reunification, aka peaceful reintegration, as the "fulfillment of the Chinese Dream" and the "shared rejuvenation of the Chinese people".

In Xi Jinping's address on cross-Strait relations, Chinese reunification was not a matter of who swallows up whom, but rather the joint creation of a new and better China. It was a process of "joint creation". In this "joint creation" process, Taiwan and the Mainland are one. Their relationship is one of equals. Unfortunately, Xi's "two sides of the Strait are one family" thesis was not treated seriously in Taiwan political circles or among the public. It was not fully discussed or evaluated. The public on Taiwan has long been guilty of kneejerk reactions in response to cross-Strait issues. When faced with changes in the external situation, it refuses to reassess the situation, draw new conclusions, or adopt new policies. Shortly after Xi Jinping delivered his "two sides of the Strait are one family" speech, the Sunflower Student Movement erupted on Taiwan. All of a sudden, anti-[Mainland] China and anti-Ma sentiment left no room for rational discussion.

The public believes the DPP may well return to power in 2016. The DPP leadership has acted humble and cautious following the election. Alas, this is superficial political posturing. It does not mean the DPP has laid out its cards as a future ruling party. It does not mean the DPP has entertained the idea of new cross-Strait relations, or transformed its party line. The DPP's smug complacency is rooted in its belief in "ballot determinism." Tsai made clear that "The biggest challenge for the DPP, is the nine in one elections. It must succeed. If it does, even [Mainland] China will alter its policy to accommodate the DPP." If the DPP wins in 2016, Tsai believe that “The Mainland will automatically change its policy," and that once “[Mainland] China changes its policy, the Americans will have no reason to object."

Tsai Ing-wen's remarks reflect deeply embedded DPP thinking. But they have alarmed the Mainland. Zhang Nianchi, who belongs to the pragmatic faction, believes that the DPP has not engaged in self-reflection, has not undergone transformation, and remains an anti-China party. If such a DPP returns to power, "It will be nothing less than a catastrophe for both sides, For Taiwan it will be an unprecedented disaster." Zhang Nianchi raised other critical questions. "If the DPP refuses to recognize the 1992 consensus, and only favors peaceful development," "If the DPP insists on one country each side," but attempts to “reap all the benefits the Mainland has bestowed upon Taiwan over the past six years," how should the Mainland authorities respond? Zhang Nianchi thinks the Mainland "needs to arrive at a new consensus, one that will provide a compass for cross-Strait relations no matter how the Taiwan Strait situation changes." "The two sides must now go one step beyond the 1992 consensus in order to deal with the new situation in cross-Strait relations."

Zhang Nianchi's proposal is something the blue and green parties must take seriously. Knowledgeable parties within the blue and green parties surely must see the big picture. First of all, the Mainland authorities will never budge in their opposition to Taiwan independence, or their support for one country, two systems, and peaceful development. Secondly, under the "one country" premise, the two sides can "co-create" a new China. Under this framework, Taiwanese consciousness can expand and become more inclusive. Thirdly, after two turbulent ruling party changes over the past decade or so, the blue and green camps have a real opportunity at symbiosis and reconciliation. After all, real growth for Taiwan can no longer be delayed. The public on Taiwan should put an end to confrontation and wheel-spinning.

To cope with the new situation in cross-Strait relations, the DPP should abandon its naive "ballot determinism," and "regime determinism." It should earnestly confront Mainland China's peaceful rise, Mainland public opposition to Taiwan independence, and Taiwan's developmental niche. It must embark upon creative destruction, and demonstrate the commitment and responsibility befitting a ruling party. The Kuomintang meanwhile, must cease consoling itself, saying "Our path was not wrong." Nor should it follow the crowd and repudiate its core beliefs as a party. On the one hand, it should review past mistakes. On the other hand, it should formulate a consensus for the future that will win the support of voters. After all, a sound and pragmatic cross-Strait policy is still one of the KMT's most valuable assets.

The Mainland is actively discussing cross-Strait policy. The blue and green parties lag behind. Both sides face a new situation. Three way red, blue, and green dialogue and consensus is all the more essential. Only this can ensure the long term peaceful development of cross-Strait relations.

社論－創造兩岸關係否極泰來契機
2015年01月09日 04:10
本報訊

太陽花學運和九合一大選後，「兩岸關係怎麼辦？」是很多人心中的大哉問。今年上半年以某種形式召開國是會議似乎已成定局，如果召開兩岸關係應該會是重要議題，面對即將到來的總統大選，兩岸關係更是民進黨與國民黨不容閃躲、無法迴避的課題，而大陸面對台灣的變局，勢必有所檢討因應。可以說，「兩岸新常態」正在台海上空醞釀。

探討「兩岸新常態」應從去年2月25日，中共總書記習近平會見國民黨榮譽主席連戰時，發表的《共圓中華民族偉大復興的中國夢》講話，作為思考的起點。其中的「兩岸一家親」理論，可說是他執政以來關於兩岸關係最新、也是最重要的論述。大陸資深台灣問題專家章念馳曾指出，大陸當局如今所提倡的統一與歷史上的統一有很大不同，已從武力征服改為「和平融合」，這在根本上改變了台灣「被統一」的地位，而正是習近平在他的幾次講話中，把這種統一、和平融合的關係稱之為「共圓中國夢」，是要「共同實現中華民族偉大復興」的關係。

也是就是說，在習近平的兩岸關係論述中，中國的統一並不是誰吃掉誰的統一，而是要共創一個更美好的新中國，體現了「共同締造」的精神，在這個「共同締造」的過程中，台灣與大陸都是統一的主體，彼此的關係是平等的。遺憾的是，在習近平「兩岸一家親」論述提出後，台灣政壇與社會大眾並沒有嚴肅認真的對待，更遑論進行仔細的思考與充分的討論，可能是因為台灣社會始終以「慣性思維」來面對兩岸課題、面對外界局勢的變化，缺少對新局勢的評估與判斷，並採取因應作為。在習近平發表「兩岸一家親」講話後不久，台灣就爆發了太陽花學運，一時之間，「反中」、「反馬」情緒高漲，更沒有理性討論的餘地。

社會人心普遍認為民進黨大有可能在2016年重新執政，民進黨中央在選後雖展現謙卑與謹慎，但這僅僅是表面的政治姿態，並不代表民進黨有意識、有計畫展露準執政黨的格局，積極討論、構思兩岸關係的新論述，徹底實現該黨的路線轉型。民進黨的故步自封，或者自我感覺良好，其實是根源於民進黨人信奉的「選票決定論」。蔡英文就曾明確表示，「民進黨最大的挑戰，就是九合一大選一定要打好。如果打好，連中國都會朝民進黨方向來調整」，蔡英文認為，如果大陸覺得民進黨會在2016年大選中獲勝，「他們自動會去創造那個條件」，而只要「中國一調整，美國人就沒有什麼好講的。」

蔡英文這段話，反映了民進黨人的深層思維，卻也讓大陸方面更為警惕，務實派的章念馳就認為民進黨是「沒有反省」、「沒有轉型」、「反中」的政黨，如果這樣的民進黨重新上台，「不啻是兩岸一場巨大災難，也是台灣的一場空前災難。」章念馳更進一步提出關鍵性的問題：「如果民進黨不承認九二共識，僅僅贊成和平發展」，「如果民進黨堅持一邊一國」，但又「願意接收6年來兩岸一切惠台政策的紅利」，大陸當局應該如何因應？章念馳認為，大陸方面「需要研究出一個新的共識，無論台海風雲變化，它都能成為兩岸關係的定海神針。」「現在兩岸需要在九二共識的基礎上進行新的發展，來應對兩岸關係的新局面。」

章念馳在大陸內部提出的呼籲，何嘗不是藍綠兩黨應該認真面對的課題？藍綠兩黨的有識之士，應該要對大局勢有清醒的認識。首先，大陸當局在反台獨、一國兩制、和平發展上的堅持並不會動搖。其次，在堅持「一國」的前提下，在兩岸「共同締造」新中國的大願景、大架構下，台灣的主體意識能夠獲得更寬廣、更具包容性的發展空間。第三，歷經兩次政黨輪替十多年的動盪，藍綠陣營都到了應該真正營造和解共生契機的時刻，畢竟台灣的發展實不容再受到延宕、再陷入停滯，台灣社會也不宜繼續分裂對立、虛耗空轉。

應對兩岸關係發展的新局面，民進黨應揚棄天真的「選票決定論」、「政權決定論」，認真面對「中國和平崛起」、「大陸民意反獨」、「台灣發展利基」三大現實課題，以大破大立的務實轉型，展現迎接執政的承擔與責任感。而在國民黨這方面，既不宜繼續以「路線沒有錯誤」來自我安慰，也不能隨波逐流，失去政黨的基本信念，而是應該一方面檢討過去失誤，一方面凝聚前瞻論述，爭取選民的支持，畢竟，穩健務實的兩岸政策仍是國民黨的最豐厚資產。

當大陸方面正積極充實兩岸新論述的時刻，藍綠兩黨又豈能落後於形勢，而面對兩岸的新局，紅藍綠三方更有必要相互對話，謀求共識，如此，兩岸關係的和平發展也才能可長可久。