War and Peace: Hsia Zhang Meeting and the Choice of Paths

War and Peace: Hsia Zhang Meeting and the Choice of Paths
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 25, 2015

Executive Summary: The Hsia Zhang meeting is a high profile display of the 1992 consensus in action. It is not a trap, but a rather a chance for ministers and officials from the two sides to treat each other with courtesy and respect. Conversely, Taiwan independence pipe dreams motivated by anti-Mainland bigotry will inevitably provoke hatred and precipitate war. Tsai Ing-wen is about to visit the United States. She must think hard about this. Will her presidential dream be dashed during her final mile? That will depend on the decisions she makes.

Full Text Below:

The Hsia Zhang meeting being held in Kinmen is a story of peace. It provides historical contrast. Half a century ago artillery shells fell on the island like rain, leaving behind scars and hatred. Back then, the two sides were irreconcilable. A half century later, the two sides' ministers and officials are meeting to discuss policy, and their laughter is wiping away old enmities.

This peace was not born out of thin air. It is rooted in the 1992 consensus. Why does this simple formula have so much impact? Because it represents the evolution of historical reality. The two sides have long been separated, beginning with a brutal civil war. Even today, the shell marks and fortifications can be seen on Kinmen, and provide a living record of the war. As we can see, an effective policy must encompass, process, and transcend that history.

In other words, the 1992 consensus may be interpreted in two ways, depending upon their own terminology. But rejection of the consensus means war, whereas acceptance of the consensus means peace. To prevent the resurgence of war, the 1992 consensus is indispensable. Rejecting this historical basis means going to war, inciting hatred, forsaking peace, and returning to the martial law that erected these fortifications and strung this barbed wire.

The 1992 consensus provides us with a comprehensive historical narrative. The long-term cease-fire following the civil war has not changed the facts. The two sides remain part of one China. This historical reality cannot be wished away by heads filled with pipe dreams of Taiwan independence. Nor can it be wished away by ambiguous use of terms such as "maintaining the status quo". Such attempts to evade historical reality and substitute a fabricated narrative cannot ensure peace. Only the 1992 consensus can do so.

The two sides finalized plans for the Wang Zhang meeting in February. This newspaper concluded that Beijing intended to refrain from interfering with ruling party changes within Taiwan. This would establish a "new normal" for the two sides. This "new normal" is aimed at peace. Its intent is to ensure that regardless of which political party is in power, communications and interactions will remain peaceful. If Beijing feels this is under control, peace can be preserved. Conversely, if this "new normal" cannot be maintained, the norm will be a new "cold war" or the "threat of war".

The Hsia Zhang meeting shows that Beijing's goals remain unchanged. Zhang Zhijun invited Hsia Li-yan to visit the Mainland. He urged a fourth meeting between officials charged with cross-Strait affairs. Last year he proposed a Wang Zhang meeting. He reiterated that "cross-Strait relations must not be stalled, still less set back." Beijing hopes the two sides can continue their official dialogue, and that peace will not suffer.

But the "new normal" is after all merely a hope. It requires that the DPP make an historic decision to accept the 1992 consensus. Only then will it be real. It cannot be wished into existence. The DPP must embrace and accept the 1992 consensus. The Hsia Zhang meeting is taking place one week before Tsai Ing-wen's visit to the US. Naturally the hope is that Tsai Ing-wen will take note and realize that the Hsia Zhang meeting constitutes a wonderful "peaceful status quo". To maintain this "peaceful status quo," Tsai Ing-wen must free herself from the shackles of the DPP and respond to this call for peace.

Tsai Ing-wen has perhaps taken one small step. She now says she hopes to "maintain the cross-Strait status quo." But the status quo and the "new normal" remain far apart. In other words, it is a long way from peace. Needless to say, the missing ingredient is the 1992 consensus. Tsai Ing-wen may find it difficult to recognize the 1992 consensus. If so, she can begin by adhering to the ROC Constitution, and forswearing Taiwan independence. She can gradually come around to the 1992 consensus. Or, she can emulate Ko Wen-che and say that she "respects the existing cross-Strait political framework." These are all ways that Tsai Ing-wen can respond to questions during her visit to Washington.

Tsai Ing-wen must realize that these steps are not difficult. In 2000, when Chen Shui-bian came to power, he took them all. He announced his "five noes". When meeting foreign guests, he said he could accept the 1992 consensus. Chen lacked international understanding. Yet even he could do that much. Is Tsai Ing-wen less capable than Chen Shui-bian? Or is Tsai Ing-wen's head too swollen from Sunflower Student Movement flattery? Has she been so seduced by anti-Mainland hatred that she can no longer see the importance of a peace that can only ensured by the 1992 consensus?

The Hsia Zhang meeting is a high profile display of the 1992 consensus in action. It is not a trap, but a rather a chance for ministers and officials from the two sides to treat each other with courtesy and respect. Conversely, Taiwan independence pipe dreams motivated by anti-Mainland bigotry will inevitably provoke hatred and precipitate war. Tsai Ing-wen is about to visit the United States. She must think hard about this. Will her presidential dream be dashed during her final mile? That will depend on the decisions she makes.


戰爭與和平：夏張會演繹的路徑選擇
2015-05-25 聯合報 聯合報            

「夏張會」選在金門，敘說一個和平的故事。它展示了一個歷史對照：半世紀前彈如雨落的創痕與仇恨，註解兩岸冰炭不容；而半世紀後兩位部長官員在此處縱論政策，笑泯恩仇。

這個和平不是憑空而生，它是由「九二共識」這根支柱所支撐。一個簡單的語詞，竟有此功效，因為它是根據真實的歷史演進磨礪而來。兩岸長期割裂的處境，是由一場殘酷的內戰而起；直至今日，金門仍以坦露地表的彈痕與工事，記載著那段戰爭歷史。於此可見，一個有能力的政治論述，必須能夠包納、處理並跨越這段歷史。

亦即，「九二共識」的兩端，連接著不同的歷史語彙，那一端是戰爭，這一頭是和平。防止戰爭回潮的，正是「九二共識」這個接點。意圖將這個歷史的承軸抽走，就意味著再去溯尋戰爭、挑動仇恨、放棄和平，返回那個用碉堡與鐵絲築成的精神戒嚴。

「九二共識」是一整套的歷史敘事，內戰之後雖已長期停火的兩岸關係，其實並未改變兩岸俱在一個中國之內的本質，這個歷史內核不能被某些人頭殼裡憑空編撰的台獨想像所瓜代，更不能以含混其詞的「維持現狀」所模糊，一切企圖否定、遮蔽這段歷史的所有另行建造的論述，都無法獲致「九二共識」所能獲致的和平。

兩岸在二月敲定「王張會」時，我們即推論，北京試圖超越台灣內部政黨輪替執政的干擾，開拓出一個兩岸的「新常態」。這個「新常態」的真正思維，就著眼於「和平」，它意欲在不同政黨執政時，仍能維持足夠的和平交往與互動，在北京可以管控的前提下，讓和平得以延續下去。相反地，若是此一「新常態」無法建立，就意味著「準戰爭」或「戰爭邊緣」將成為另一種常態。

這次「夏張會」證明北京的願望依然未改，張志軍藉著邀請夏立言訪陸，推動第四次的兩岸事務首長會見，而又對著夏立言搬出去年「王張會」時的談話，重申「絕不能讓兩岸關係再遭折騰，更不能走回頭路」。這意味，北京希望兩岸官方對話能夠持續不輟，和平不會橫遭破壞。

然而，「新常態」畢竟只能表達一種主觀意志 ，它必須透過民進黨與「九二共識」完成歷史性的接軌，才可能真正鞏固。亦即，它不能憑空而存，仍然需要民進黨最終擁抱與接納「九二共識」。因此，「夏張會」選在蔡英文訪美前一周舉行，當然是希望對蔡英文作出政治召喚，讓蔡英文再看一眼：「夏張會」豈不是一個美好的「和平現狀」？若要繼續保有這一美好的「和平現狀」，蔡英文必須能夠掙脫民進黨的舊有窠臼，回應這個和平的號召。

蔡英文或許已走出一小步，她聲稱要「維持兩岸現狀」。但「維持現狀」與「新常態」仍有巨大差距，也就是說，它跟「和平」仍有很大差距。不消多說，它就是缺少了「九二共識」這根支柱。但承認「九二共識」，蔡英文若是一時難以做到，或可以嘗試從服膺中華民國憲法出發，並以宣示不追尋獨立為底線，再逐步尋求向「九二共識」靠近。或者，亦可仿效柯文哲說法：「尊重兩岸既有的政治基礎」。這些皆是蔡英文訪美時，可以回應華府考題的說法。

蔡英文若不健忘，這些步驟，都非難事。兩千年忽焉上台的陳水扁，已一一做到，他不僅宣示了「四不一沒有」，甚至在接見外賓時，一度表達可以接受「九二共識」。缺少國際視野的陳水扁，尚且能做到這一點，蔡英文難道還比不上陳水扁的識時務？或者，蔡英文被太陽花學運那些浮誇、躁動的仇中主張所誘惑或引導，因而不能看清「九二共識」所能承托的和平盛景？

「夏張會」是「九二共識」擴張性與延展性的高度展示，「九二共識」不僅不是讓人掉入陷阱，反而是讓兩岸部長級官員以禮相待，實事求是。相反地，仇中的台獨異夢卻必然呼喚仇恨和戰爭，蔡英文赴美前應有所深思。她的總統夢，會不會又潰敗於最後一哩，在於她的抉擇。