Politics As Usual: KMT Retreats into the Past, DPP Builds Castles in the Air

Politics As Usual: KMT Retreats into the Past, DPP Builds Castles in the Air
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 30, 2015

Executive Summary: The KMT has yet again sought refuge in the past. For this, we feel sad. But if the Better Tomorrow promised by the Democratic Progressive Party fails to materialize, the disappointment will be even more unimaginable.

Full Text Below:

The KMT Central Standing Committee has amended the "Speaker Clause". It has custom tailored the clause to enable Wang Jin-pyng to remain a Legislator without Portfolio for Life. This comes on the heels of the KMT's forcible ousting of Hung Hsiu-chu as KMT presidential candidate, and her replacement with Eric Chu. The KMT has yet again bowed to electoral realpolitik. The move may have been necessary to avoid a debacle in the upcoming general election. But how did the KMT get itself into this mess in the first place? The answer is simple: party leadership myopia. All that these leaders see is the ground one foot in front of their feet. They fail to see the big picture. They fail to achieve a bird's eye perspective. The result is they constantly misjudge the situation, and are constantly forced to retreat.

Unforunately as of late, the KMT has been retreating into the past. Example One. Eric Chu announced in May that he would not run for president. Had he not done so, his election prospects would be vastly better than they are today. Party morale would be as well. Local party candidates would not be as tempted as they are to defect. The party would not be on the verge of a catastrophic rout. Alas, Eric Chu saw the light five months late. Only then did he step forward. By then he had already missed his window of opportunity. Even worse, he had to take heat for trampling the KMT's nomination process into the dust.

Example Two. Had Wang Jing-pyng announced his candidacy for the party's presidential primaries in May, he might have fulfilled his long-cherished dream of reaching the political summit. B-Lister Hung Hsiu-chu would not have felt compelled to step forward, only to be unceremoniously ousted and replaced. Wang missed his opportunity to run for president. He is eligible to run for legislator without porfolio. But the KMT custom tailored its rules just for him, provoking a backlash within the party. KMT morale has suffered. The party's chances in the legislative election have diminished. The likelihood that Wang Jin-pyng can reclaim his previous position as Speaker of the Legislature has also diminished. The deficits clearly outweigh any benefits.

Example Three. President Ma's power transfer was piecemeal. Had it been more comprehensive, the ruling party would have been bequeathed more substantial policy and personnel legacy. The nine in one election debacle last year might not have taken place. Eric Chu might not have felt compelled to seek a second term as New Taipei Mayor, to promise to remain for the full duration of his term. This year's party nomination fiasco might have been avoided. For eight years, the Ma government refused to groom its successors. Not one Ma administration official had the guts to defend adminstration policy. At election time however, they suddenly began running around like Chicken Little. The Ma administration's hiring practices made the above abundantly clear. Now Ma Ying-jeou cannot prevent Wang Jin-pyng from seeking to become a legislator without portfolio. Eric Chu has been relentlessly blasting Ma government policy. If not for selfishness yesterday, would KMT leaders be distancing themselves from each other today?

Go back five months. Opportunities and legitimacy were lost. Go back one year. Wang Jin-pyng could have run as legislator on his own. Go back eight years. Ma Ying-jeou refused to defend his own administration's policies. He backed down repeatedly. As a result of inside and outside pressure, his eight year legacy may be lost. For the KMT, this is a tragedy. It ruled for eight years. It endured bitter struggles. Alas it lacked the political finesse required to fulfill its ideals. In the end, the only thing it could do, was to bow before harsh reality.

Consider the matter from another angle. The KMT sees retreating to the past a necessary compromise to cope with current realities. It may be right. Perhaps this is only way it can start over again. But the KMT must learn from past mistakes. It must consider long-term growth and the big picture, not merely selfish interest and short term advantage. Otherwise, even if the party wins, the people will lose. Tsai Ing-wen's current campaign is a cakewalk, thanks to the KMT's internal disarray. Without firing a shot, the DPP has gained the upper hand. Many blue camp supporters are still obssessing over the Ma vs. Wang power struggle. They are fighting over nothing.

The KMT has repeatedly retreated into the past. But one must also be wary of the other extreme, the DPP's perennial and imaginary "Better Tomorrow". 

The Democratic Progressive Party has changed its leader. It is now led by Tsai Ing-wen. The party is currently the beneficiary of a favorable political climate. But otherwise, it is almost exactly the same as it was eight years ago. The green camp has undergone no fundamental change in thinking or rhetoric over the past eight years. It has not conducted an analysis of Taiwan's current plight. It has not offered any solutions to Taiwan's current problems. Taiwan continues to wander down blind alleys. It continues to run into the same political and economic obstacles. Expecting a new ruling party to suddenly see the light, is far too optimistic.

Promising a Better Tomorrow is easy. The Democratic Progressive Party's election prospects are bright.  This is primarily the work of Hong Chung-chiu, the Sunflower Student Movement, opponents of the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant, and opponents to history curriculum revision. Successive political movements have induced the younger generation to hate China, to hate Ma, and become pro-green. They brim over with "love for Taiwan". But their narrow-minded emotionalism will not help Taiwan. Tsai Ing-wen has cites a list of concerns. They include cross-Strait relations, industrial restructuring, pension reform, housing and social justice, care for the underprivileged, an aging population, and joining the TPP. But has anyone heard a considered solution? Criticising the ruling KMT is easy. But offering effective remedies is difficult. It requires know how. Absent any debate, we see no evidence of such wisdom inside the DPP.

The KMT has yet again sought refuge in the past. For this, we feel sad. But if the Better Tomorrow promised by the Democratic Progressive Party fails to materialize, the disappointment will be even more unimaginable.

國民黨一再退回昨天 民進黨持續虛構明天

2015-10-30 聯合報

國民黨中常會鬆綁「議長條款」，為王金平量身打造續任不分區立委的資格；繼「抽柱換朱」之後，這是國民黨再度為選舉向現實低頭。儘管這是為了避免大選崩盤不得不為之舉措，但國民黨若細思自己何以走到這種欲進不前的地步，最主要原因，是黨內領導人都只看著自己腳尖前方一尺之地，卻忘了從高處著眼縱觀大局；其結果就是誤判形勢，只能被逼得不斷往後倒退。

說來可悲，但國民黨最近走的路、轉的彎，一直是在「退回昨天」。例如：其一，如果朱立倫五月底不宣布棄選總統，他今天的聲勢一定大為不同，黨內的士氣必然更旺，地方也不致頻遭挖角，而兵敗如山倒。但是，他卻錯過了五個月的時間才想清楚這點，重披戰袍後，還要承受破壞初選程序的不名譽指摘，最佳時機早已失去。

其二，如果王金平五月宣布參加黨內總統初選，他至少有機會一試他嚮往多時的「登孤峰」滋味，不致弄到洪秀柱以二軍上陣卻又遭強換的窘境。而如今王金平錯失參選總統的機會，雖獲不分區立委之禮遇，但國民黨臨陣為他修改規章，也引發反彈。且國民黨的士氣經此摧折，立委選情大受影響，王金平重回國會議長寶座的機率大降，終究得不償失。

其三，馬總統的交班布局如果周全，在政策上和人事上都應留給執政黨更多可以運用的餘裕及政績遺產；如此，或不致發生去年底九合一選舉的慘敗，也不致發生朱立倫去年被迫再參選新北市長，並許下「做滿」之承諾，導致今年猶豫難決。包括馬政府八年未能妥善培養人才，內部一片怯戰，以致四處選情告急；馬政府用人偏好的缺失，至此一目了然。如今，馬英九非僅擋不住王金平續任不分區立委，朱立倫近日連續開砲批評馬政府政策；如果沒有先前的各自為政，怎麼會有今天的強行切割？

退回五個月前的朱立倫，喪失了先機和正當性；退回一年前的王金平，可能由議長變成光桿立委；而倒回昨日的馬英九，則一讓再讓，只剩下內外迫促的逼人情勢，八年政績可能不保。這是國民黨的莫大悲哀，執政八年多少苦心孤詣，卻缺乏相稱的政治手腕來鞏固自己的理想，到頭來卻只能向現實俯首稱臣。

換一個角度看，如果「回到昨天」是國民黨面對生存現實的必要妥協，那麼就算是必須倒退，恐怕也不能不為，唯有如此才能重新出發。關鍵是，國民黨必須從這樣的盲動中學到教訓：政黨的發展必須要有長遠的大局觀照，不能只從一己的利害出發，或僅從眼前的得失盤算；否則徒然大權在握，卻已民心盡失。蔡英文此役能打得如此輕鬆，全是拜國民黨酣於內鬥、自亂陣腳所賜，不費一兵一卒即取得上風。在這種情況，許多藍軍支持者還在為「馬王之爭」的結局惆悵，純屬徒勞。

在慨嘆國民黨一再「退回昨日」的同時，人們必須警惕的是，在另一端，卻是不斷虛構「明天會更好」的民進黨。與八年前相比，今天的民進黨，除了主帥換成蔡英文、側翼增添了「時代力量」之外，核心骨幹幾乎仍然是同一批兵馬。八年來，人們不曾聽聞綠營的思維或論述有什麼根本的修正或調整，也未見他們對台灣今天的處境作出多少深刻的分析，更未見其提出獨到之解方。在這種情況下，要說台灣不斷走入窄巷的政經困境，會因為政黨輪替就豁然開朗，恐怕太過樂觀。

明天的美景是很容易虛構的。民進黨這次大選形勢看漲，主要是洪仲丘、太陽花、反核四、反課綱等幾波運動所推促而成，年輕世代因為反中、反馬，轉而湧向「挺綠」。其中，固然洋溢著「愛台」的熱情，卻可能因過度褊狹與流於情緒，未必能獲致「利台」之果。事實上，不論是兩岸關係、產業轉型、年金改革、居住正義、弱勢照護、乃至人口老化或加入ＴＰＰ等大小問題，蔡英文提出的政見固然長篇累牘，但仔細分析，人們又何曾聽到茅塞頓開或一針見血的解決之道？原因無他，譴責執政黨易如反掌，但要拿出比對方厲害的仙丹，卻得要有一身本事才行；至少，未經辯論的大選，我們看不出民進黨高明何在。

今天，我們為國民黨一再退回昨天而感到憂傷；但明天台灣如果走不進民進黨虛構的未來，那樣的失望恐怕就難以想像。