Beijing Should Affirm Hung Hsiu-chu's Cross-Strait Policy

Beijing Should Affirm Hung Hsiu-chu's Cross-Strait Policy
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 15, 2015

Executive Summary: Hung Hsiu-chu has passed the KMT's preliminary candidate poll. She is about to become the KMT presidential candidate. She advocates a "one China, one interpretation" stance that affirms the two sides' political status. She advocates a peace agreement to ensure cross-Strait peace. Early on in the primaries, she published a document entitled, "Hung Hsiu-chu: Discourse on Cross-Strait Politics", laying out her proposals, clearly and responsibly, in black ink on white paper for the world to see. This shows that a peace agreement is the main plank in her campaign platform.

Full Text Below:

Hung Hsiu-chu has passed the KMT's preliminary candidate poll. She is about to become the KMT presidential candidate. She advocates a "one China, one interpretation" stance that affirms the two sides' political status. She advocates a peace agreement to ensure cross-Strait peace. Early on in the primaries, she published a document entitled, "Hung Hsiu-chu: Discourse on Cross-Strait Politics", laying out her proposals, clearly and responsibly, in black ink on white paper for the world to see. This shows that a peace agreement is the main plank in her campaign platform.

Hung Hsiu-chu's cross-Strait policy announcement elicted two different reactions. Some applauded Hung Hsiu-chu, saying she had the courage to confront the core issues in cross-Strait relations and propose solutions. They said Hung Hsiu-chu transcended Ma Ying-jeou's timid "no [immediate] reunification, no Taiwan independence, no use of force" stance. Others asked, "What is one China?", and "What are cross-Strait relations?". They said the core issue requires "one interpretation" rather than "different interpretations."

Hung Hsiu-chu's stance on the Republic of China is crystal clear. It reveals Tsai Ing-wen's "backdoor listing" of the ROC constitutional system for what it is, rhetorical deception. Hung upholds our sovereignty over the South China Sea islands inside the 11 Dotted Line. She has sided with Beijing in its dispute with Washington over the South China Sea.

DPP members and KMT supporters of Wang Jin-pying have begun red-baiting Hung Hsiu-chu. They are accusing her of provoking internal strife in order to win the primaries, of reigniting struggles over ethnic identity and reunification vs. independence, of standing outside "mainstream Taiwanese society". They are condemning Hung Hsiu-chu for advocating "eventual reunification". They say her stance cannot win the approval of the public on Taiwan. They say she will become a sinner against history who destroyed the Kuomintang.

These boos and catcalls have a source. Taiwan was under the thumb of Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian for nearly 20 years. Their separatist view of history characterized the Mainland as "the other". Their indoctrination of the public was relentless and uninterrupted. Ma Ying-jeou came to office in 2008. He promoted cross-Strait exchanges, but did almost nothing to reaffirm the two sides' shared identity. As a result the gap between the two sides widened, until it was even wider than it had been under Chen Shui-bian.

Ma government timidity led to today's plight, where no one on Taiwan has the courage to discuss political identity and a peace agreement. Most people ar terrified of red-baiting. At most they timidly invoke the 1992 consensus, "maintaining the status quo", or "different interpretations". They dare not go beyond. They know if they do, they will be roundly condemned and may lose their election campaigns. This self-censorship has resulted in blue camp evasion to avoid red-baiting. It has made it easy for opponents of Hung Hsiu-chu to accuse her of being a "Communist sympathizer".

The key plank in Hung Hsiu-chu's campaign platform is the signing of a peace agreement. This is of enormous significance for the future of cross-Strait relations. If Hung is successful, the two sides will be forced to confront this serious issue. If she fails, or is successfully tarred with a red brush during the campaign, a cross-Strait peace agreement will be impossible, and will not become part of rational political dialogue on Taiwan.

If that happens, no politician on Taiwan will ever have the courage to mention a peace agreement again. Any discussion of a peace agreement would be excluded from political dialogue. The two sides will never enjoy a stable political framework, and will continue to be pawns of US East Asian strategy.

The content of Hung Hsiu-chu's One China, One Interpretation policy is crystal clear. In terms of sovereignty, One China does not refer to either side. It means that the two sides combined equal China as a whole. According to the two sides' constitutions, their declared sovereignty overlaps. In terms of jurisdiction, the two sides both claim constitutional and political authority over all of China, and are equal but separate from each other.

Put simply, Hung Hsiu-chu's cross-strait peace agreement includes ensuring undivided sovereignty over the whole of China. But both sides must accept each others' constitutional and political authority.

The ROC government is not merely a legal reality. It is also a political reality. This is a central reality that ruling and opposition parties in Taipei cannot deny. One China, Undivided Sovereignty is Beijing's bottom line. Hung Hsiu-chu's bottom line is One China, One Interpretation. It will enable the two sides to accept each other's core values, and will be an importan factor in the signing of a cross-Strait peace agreement.

Beijing must now ask itself what it wants to do. Will it stand by and watch as Hung Hsiu-chu struggles alone? Or will it seize this rare opportunity to respond appropriately? It all depends on Beijing.

北京應回應洪秀柱兩岸論述

2015-6-15 中國時報

洪秀柱已經通過國民黨的「防磚民調」，即將成為國民黨的總統候選人。她主張兩岸應該在「一中同表」的基礎上，確定兩岸政治定位，簽署和平協議，確保兩岸和平發展。她並在初選的第一時間，就對外公布《洪秀柱對於兩岸政治論述的說帖》，清楚與負責地將主張，以白紙黑字方式公開呈現。這也表示，和平協議是她這次參選的主要訴求。

洪秀柱的兩岸論述一提出，立刻面對兩種不同反應。一是認為洪秀柱能夠勇於面對兩岸的核心問題，並提出解決方案，給予掌聲。洪秀柱超越馬英九偏安一隅的「不統、不獨」消極主張，認為兩岸在「何謂一中」、「兩岸是甚麼關係」核心問題上必須「共同表述」，而不是「各自表述」。

洪秀柱清晰的中華民國立場，讓蔡英文拿中華民國憲政體制做幌子的「借殼上市」把戲現出原形，她堅持南海十一段線內的島嶼主權，等於為北京在與華府就南海爭議上，解除了法理與事實上的後顧之憂。

另一種反應來自民進黨以及國民黨內一些挺王金平的名嘴，他們開始給洪秀柱戴「紅帽子」及「統帽子」，認為她為了贏得初選，不惜挑起台灣內部已經逐漸撫平的族群與統獨之爭，自絕於台灣社會的「主流」價值。他們批評洪秀柱是「終極統一」的統派，不會得到台灣民眾的認同，甚而會成為摧毀國民黨的罪人。

這些噓聲與嘲諷不是沒有基礎。台灣經歷李扁近20年的執政，分離史觀的教育，兩岸為「異己關係」政治論述從未停過，即使馬英九在2008年執政起，推動兩岸大交流，但是在強化兩岸共同認同與互信上卻幾乎沒有著墨，致使兩岸認同的差距，遠遠超過陳水扁時期。

馬政府的消極作為，讓台灣已經沒有人還敢於再討論政治定位與和平協議。大多數人擔心被扣帽子，最多也僅於提出「九二共識」、「維持現狀」、「各自表述」這些消極的主張，而不敢向前跨越，並認為如果跨越會挨罵，並有可能失掉選舉。這些自我設限，讓藍營遇帽子則逃，也讓洪的對手可以輕易給她戴帽子。

對兩岸關係未來發展來說，洪秀柱以簽署和平協議做為其參選的核心政見，有其非常重大的意義。如果她成功，兩岸必然要面對這個重要且嚴肅的問題，但是如果她失敗，或者在參選過程中不斷被抹紅，讓兩岸和平協議無法正確及理性地進入台灣的重要政治議程，而被迫選擇放棄。

果真如此，從此以後，在台灣的政壇，大概將沒有人還有意願、勇氣與能力討論和平協議。和平協議的討論可能就被迫退出台灣的政治議程，兩岸關係從此以後不會有穩定的政治結構或框架，而繼續淪為美國東亞戰略的棋子。

洪秀柱的「一中同表」內容非常清楚，即在主權方面，「一中」不單指兩岸任何一方，而是兩個加起來的「整個中國」，兩岸政府依其憲法對於主權的宣示是重疊的。在治權方面，兩岸都是整個中國內部的兩個憲政治權，彼此是平等分立的。

簡單地說，洪秀柱主張的「兩岸和平協議」版本裡面包括兩岸應該保證不分裂整個中國的主權，但是兩岸也必須接受彼此為憲政治權。

中華民國政府的存在不僅是法理事實，也是政治現實，更是台北方面朝野各黨均不可能退讓的核心堅持；「一個中國、主權完整」也是北京不可能讓步的核心底線。現在洪秀柱用「一中同表」讓兩岸共同接受彼此的核心堅持與底線，並用以做為兩岸和平協議的簽署重要內涵。

此時此刻，北京必須認真思考，選擇袖手旁觀，讓洪秀柱自唱自演，還是抓住這個難得的機遇做出適當回應，全在北京一念之間。