Dark Cloud or Silver Lining: Barbara Schrage's Warning to Tsai Ing-wen

Dark Cloud or Silver Lining: Barbara Schrage's Warning to Tsai Ing-wen
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 27, 2015

Executive Summary: As a Western expression notes, "Every cloud has a silver lining." The DPP and Tsai Ing-wen must acknowledge the true meaning of Barbara Schrage's comments. They must be wiser and less reckless. They must cease forcing Washington's hand. Constant evasion, and failure to offer a mutually acceptable cross-Strait policy, amounts to a refusal to see Washington's silver linings.

Full Text Below:

Former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) executive director Barbara Schrage recently urged Tsai Ing-wen to offer a concrete and feasible cross-Strait policy in advance of next year's presidential election. She said that the people of Taiwan have a right to know. Former AIT Taipei Office Director Douglas Paal said that the 1992 consensus is Beijing's bottom line. Alas, Tsai Ing-wen's response was, "Comments by retired officials do not represent the US position."

Barbara Schrage said the United States respects Taiwan's democracy, and should not intervene in its election. But she also said continued cross-Strait cooperation was consistent with US interests. Therefore she looked forward to US government agencies, "current or future", quietly pressuring the DPP leadership, especially Tsai Ing-wen, to narrow the differences in cross-Strait policy. Barbara Schrage left the AIT early last year. Only then did she relinquish her responsibilities as executive director. She was responsible for Taiwan affairs for many years. In all that time she was always extremely guarded in her statements. Therefore, when she suddenly spoke so frankly and straightforwardly, this alarmed the DPP leadership.

Tsai Ing-wen's first response was fairly calm. She said she would endeavour to maintain the cross-Strait status quo. DPP Secretary-General Joseph Wu however, panicked. He immediately denied that this was the United States' official position. He blasted Schrage's comments. He even denounced the venue that Barbara Schrage spoke at, saying it was "sponsored by a pro-China group". He demanded that retired US officials refrain from commenting. The DPP reacted virtually the same way it reacts to political opponents inside Taiwan.

The DPP reaction was so vehement, the nightmare of September 2011, when Tsai Ing-wen was “ambushed” by White House National Security Council senior officials, may well repeat itself. At the time, Tsai Ing-wen and Ma Ying-jeou were running for president. Ma Ying-jeou governed for four years. The US repeatedly affirmed the Ma government's cross-Strait policy. By contrast, Tsai Ing-wen's cross-Strait policy consisted of vague references to a "Taiwan consensus". This is unconvincing to the public on Taiwan. It is even less convincing to US officials.

As a result, Tsai Ing-wen and her party left Washington early. She was still on the plane to Boston when the Financial Times quoted an unnamed senior US official, who said the Obama administration was worried that if Tsai Ing-wen was elected, that might strain relations with Mainland China. This took Tsai Ing-wen by surprise. It even affected the election results. The senior official in question was believed to be National Security Adviser Thomas E. Donilon.

At the time, Tsai Ing-wen was accompanied by Barbara Schrage. This time, speaking at the symposium, she mentioned this incident from the past. She said Tsai Ing-wen focused only on the process, and failed to offer any clear conclusions. What the US government wanted to hear, was concrete solutions to cross-Strait issues. Barbara Schrage was blunt. She said Tsai's remarks were disappointing.

Barbara Schrage pointed out Tsai Ing-wen's cross-Strait policy Achilles Heel. That was of course embarrassing. But the DPP should not have responded in such a negative manner. In fact, Barbara Schrage's comments were a gesture of Washington's goodwill.

Tsai Ing-wen is preparing to visit Washington. She will meet senior Obama administration officials. She will run into the same people who distrusted her in 2011, such as Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, and then National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs Daniel Russel, who is currently Assistant Secretary of State for Asian-Pacific Affairs. Succeeding him is Evan Medeiros, a novice. The DPP hopes that Washington will allow Tsai Ing-wen to meet Undersecretary of State Anthony Blinken, just as it allowed Ma Ying-jeou back then.

Washington has observed Tsai Ing-wen for many years. It is no stranger to her thought patterns and habits. Its perception of her as "lacking in substance" remains unchanged. Therefore it intentionally asked Barbara Schrage to give Tsai advance warning, lest she repeat her past mistake of spewing hollow rhetoric. This was Washington's first gesture of goodwill.

Washington understands Tsai Ing-wen quite well. But four years have passed. Times have changed. It noted the outcome of the nine in one elections. Barbara Schrage's comments suggest that the US knows the DPP could win in 2016. Taiwan could undergo yet another change in ruling parties. The United States is prepared to accept a "President Tsai". This was Washington's second gesture of goodwill.

Barbara Schrage represents mainstream opinion in Washington. She is hoping that Tsai Ing-wen will demonstrate courageous leadership on cross-Strait policy. She is hoping that Tsai Ing-wen will not offer vague policies that fail to meet outside concerns. or introduce any unclear consensus that leads to international or internal Taiwan uncertainty. As we can see, Washington has not criticized her comments. This lack of criticism, was Washington's third gesture of goodwill.

As a Western expression notes, "Every cloud has a silver lining." The DPP and Tsai Ing-wen must acknowledge the true meaning of Barbara Schrage's comments. They must be wiser and less reckless. They must cease forcing Washington's hand. Constant evasion, and failure to offer a mutually acceptable cross-Strait policy, amounts to a refusal to see Washington's silver linings.

聯合／烏雲或銀邊：施藍旗給蔡英文的訊息
2015-03-27 02:07:34 聯合報 聯合報社論

美國在台協會（ＡＩＴ）前執行理事施藍旗最近敦促蔡英文提出實質可行的兩岸政策，因為明年總統大選前「台灣人民有權利知道」；ＡＩＴ台北辦事處前處長包道格也提醒，「九二共識」是北京的底線。對於兩人談話，蔡英文的反應都是間接迴避：「卸任官員的談話不代表美國的立場。」

施藍旗雖表明美國應尊重台灣的民主體制，不應介入選舉，卻提到兩岸持續合作才符合美國的利益。也因此，她期待美國行政部門「已經或在未來」繼續積極把握機會，「悄悄施壓民進黨的領導階層，尤其是蔡英文」，以形塑縮小兩岸歧異的中國政策。施藍旗去年初才卸下ＡＩＴ執行理事職務，儘管她負責美國對台事務多年，但一向謹言慎行；因此，如此坦率直白的發言，很快就驚動了民進黨高層。

蔡英文第一時間的反應還算平和，重申會盡力維持兩岸的現狀；但民進黨秘書長吳釗燮就顯得氣急敗壞，除了馬上否認這是美國的官方立場，貶抑施藍旗談話的代表性外，還把施藍旗發言的場合貼上「傾中團體主辦」的標籤，要求美國退休官員自制。這樣的反應，幾乎就是民進黨對付台灣內部政敵的制式態度。

民進黨的反應如此強烈，恐怕還是擔心二○一一年九月蔡英文訪美時，遭到白宮國安會高層官員「突襲」的噩夢重演，有以致之。當時，蔡英文正和馬英九競選總統，馬英九執政四年，美方已多次肯定馬政府開展兩岸關係的努力；反觀蔡英文，在兩岸政策上只能提出空泛的「台灣共識」，對台灣而言已經顯得缺乏說服力，更難讓美方官員信服。

因此，俟蔡英文一行一離開華府，人還在前往波士頓的飛機上，英國「金融時報」就引述一位不具名美國資深官員稱，歐巴馬政府擔心若蔡英文當選，可能升高與中國的緊張關係。此舉，不僅讓蔡英文措手不及，某種程度也影響到其選舉結果。據信，這位資深官員正是當時的國家安全顧問唐尼倫。

當時曾陪同蔡英文的施藍旗，在這次發言的研討會上，也提到了這段過往。她說，蔡英文「只注重過程，沒有明確的結論；美國政府想聽的是，她處理兩岸問題的明確計畫是什麼？」施藍旗隨即直言：「老實說，她在這方面的說法，讓人感到失望。」

施藍旗點出了蔡英文的兩岸政策迄今曖昧不明的罩門，這固然難堪，但民進黨沒有必要立刻還以如此負面的反應。事實上，若調整一下角度看施藍旗的談話，還能看到華府的善意。

蔡英文籌備中的華府行，將見到的歐巴馬政府資深官員，仍會是二○一一年幾個不信任她的老面孔，例如副國家安全顧問羅茲。當時的國安會亞洲事務資深主任羅素，如今已成了國務院亞太事務助理國務卿，接任的麥艾文，則還是新手。民進黨希望華府能比照當年的馬英九，安排蔡英文見到副國務卿布林肯。

對華府而言，已觀察、應對蔡英文多年，對她的思考模式與習性毫不陌生，認為她「務虛」的主觀認知依然未變。因此，或許故意透過施藍旗預先提醒，免得蔡又重蹈「空心」覆轍。此為善意之一。

此外，雖然華府十分了解蔡英文，但和四年前比，客觀環境卻已大相逕庭。如施藍旗所言，九合一選舉民進黨大勝後，美國已意識到台灣可能再度政黨輪替，等於表明美國已經準備接受「蔡總統」。此為善意之二。

因此，施藍旗代表華府的主流意見，希望蔡英文拿出「有勇氣的領導力」，在兩岸政策上不要用無法滿足外界關切的模糊方案，或推出不清楚的共識，造成國際社會與台灣內部疑慮。也可視為華府對她的期許，而非批評，此為善意之三。

誠如西諺所云：「每朵烏雲都鑲著銀邊（silver lining）。」民進黨和蔡英文若能正視施藍旗談話的真正意涵，多點智慧，少點魯莽，就不會自限在華府施壓或警告的烏雲中；否則，一直閃爍迴避，提不出各方較可接受的兩岸政策，就看不到華府指點迷津的銀邊。