Does the DPP Really Have the Ability to Reject the 1992 Consensus?

Does the DPP Really Have the Ability to Reject the 1992 Consensus? 
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation 
April 26, 2016

Executive Summary: The DPP finds itself caught on the horns of a dilemma. It once opposed US pork imports. But it can oppose them no longer. It seeks globalization, and longs to cozy up to the US. But it would willingly see Taiwan and the Mainland clash head on. Everyone knows that enabling US pork imports while preventing cross-Strait peace is a losing proposition. The DPP must ask itself, "Do we really have the ability to reject the 1992 Consensus?"

Full Text Below:

COA chairman-elect Tsao Chi-hung asked, "Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?" Actually the DPP should be asking itself, "Do we really have the ability to reject the 1992 Consensus?"

Every time the DPP has gone from being the opposition party to the ruling party, it has reversed itself. Before it opposed US beef and pork imports. It staged a five day, four night “sleep in” on the floor of the Legislative Yuan. It demanded that President Ma step down. It called the Minister of Agriculture an "asshole". It demanded a "zero-tolerance policy". It issued all sorts of tough statements. But today it has surrendered without a fight, saying, "Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?"

The DPP has gone from being the opposition party to the ruling party. Therefore its strategic goals have changed. When it was in the opposition, it opposed US beef and pork imports in order to attack the KMT and Ma Ying-jeou. It shouted, "Protect public health, defend the pig farmers, oppose pandering to the US and selling out Taiwan". Now that it is in power, it seeks to join the TPP and ensure friendly Taiwan-US relations. It says, “Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?”

The DPP's repeated reversals are of course contemptible. But it realizes that when it goes from being the opposition party to being the ruling party, it must reverse itself. If the DPP believes that joining the TPP is more important than opposing US pork imports, then all it can do is say "Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?”

Since globalization is our strategic objective, this is the correct attitude. The Ma government also sought to join the TPP. It also focused on globalization. But when the DPP was in the opposition, it swept aside the Ma government's considerations. It shouted "Protect public health, defend the pig farmers”, and pretended globalization and joining the TPP were of no concern.

When the DPP was an opposition party, it opposed US beef and pork imports. It demanded that Ma Ying-jeou step down as president. Now that Tsai Ing-wen has come to power, it shouts, "Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?”

Globalization will improve Taiwan's economy and ensure its political security. Therefore it is a strategic objective that the DPP as ruling party must pursue. That is why the DPP says, "Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?” But based on the very same strategic considerations, shouldn't the DPP be also asking itself, “Do we really have the ability to reject the 1992 consensus?"

Globalization is out strategic objective. Therefore we seek to join the TPP and befriend the US.  Globalization is our strategic objective. Therefore we seek to join the RCEP, optimize ECFA, and maintain peaceful cross-Strait relations. In order to join the TPP, the DPP is willing to sacrifice the pig farmers. It says "Taiwan can afford to pay the price". But the DPP also needs to ask itself what price it is willing to pay for repudiating the 1992 consensus? Can Taiwan afford to pay that price?

Globalization is our strategic goal. The DPP's policy on US pork imports contradicts its policy on the 1992 Consensus. The DPP has painted itself into a corner. If is trapped between a globalization that panders to the US, and a delusional "globalization without [Mainland] China". Can Taiwan join the TPP? Perhaps. Although this is far from certain. Repudiation of the 1992 Consensus however, means the end of cross-Strait peace. Taiwan will be unable to globalize. If the two sides clash, the political and economic consequences for Taiwan will be unimaginable.

Merely joining the TPP will not result in Taiwan's globalization. The TPP accounts for only 35% of Taiwan's total trade, and only 33% of Taiwan's total exports. The RCEP on the other hand, accounts for fully 56% of Taiwan's total trade, and 58% of Taiwan's total exports. The DPP seeks to cozy up to the US, while keeping Mainland China at arm's length. It seeks to join the TPP, and is perfectly willing to forgo membership in the RCEP. But suppose Taiwan cannot join the RCEP? Suppose ECFA is undermined? Add unwanted surprises related to the TPP, and we must ask ourselves, does Taiwan really have the ability to endure the consequences?

When the DPP was an opposition party, it opposed US pork imports. Now that it is the ruling party, it asks, “Do we really have the ability to reject US pork imports?" When the DPP was an opposition party, it opposed the 1992 Consensus. Now that it is the ruling party, it needs to ask itself, “Do we really have the ability to reject the 1992 Consensus?” Taiwan's pursuit of globalization, political and economic, depends on cross-Strait relations. The loss of that political foundation could threaten Taiwan's economic and political survival. The DPP must ask itself whether Taiwan can endure the consequences of repudiating the 1992 Consensus. Can it withstand “the earth moving and the mountains shaking”?

The DPP finds itself caught on the horns of a dilemma. It once opposed US pork imports. But it can oppose them no longer. It seeks globalization, and longs to cozy up to the US. But it would willingly see Taiwan and the Mainland clash head on. Everyone knows that enabling US pork imports while preventing cross-Strait peace is a losing proposition. The DPP must ask itself, "Do we really have the ability to reject the 1992 Consensus?"

哪有能耐不接受九二共識

2016-04-26聯合報

候任農委會主委曹啟鴻說：「我們哪有能耐不開放美豬？」民進黨也可自問：「我們哪有能耐不接受九二共識？」

民進黨換了位置就換了腦袋。昔日反美牛、美豬，五天四夜在立法院打地鋪，「總統下台」、「混蛋部長」、「零檢出」什麼狠話都說過，但今天未戰先降，說：「哪有能耐不開放？」

民進黨由在野到執政，因此戰略目標也變了。昔日在野，反美牛美豬，是以打擊國民黨及馬英九為最高戰略目標，高喊「挺國民健康／護豬農利益／反傾美賣台」；如今執政，卻改以「加入TPP」、「友善台美關係」為最高戰略目標，故稱「哪有能耐不開放？」

民進黨這種「髮夾彎」的反覆，固然卑鄙醜惡，但畢竟知道，由在野到執政，不能不換腦袋。民進黨若認為，執政後，「加入TPP」是高於「反美豬」的國家利益，那麼自然就要說：「哪有能耐不開放？」

以「全球化」為國家最高戰略目標，此種覺悟是對的。馬政府的美牛、美豬政策，當然也有「加入TPP」的考量，亦是著眼於全球化；但在野的民進黨卻不容馬政府作此考量，完全以「國民健康／豬農利益」為主張，眼中根本沒有全球化及TPP。

現在，民進黨要執政了，所以，當年反美牛、美豬，對著馬英九喊「總統下台」的民進黨，今日在蔡英文「總統上台」之際，竟喊出「哪有能耐不開放？」

全球化將改變台灣的經濟運作並獲致較大的政治安全，所以，以全球化為國家最高戰略目標，是執政的民進黨應追求的目標，因此改稱「哪有能耐不開放？」而同樣基於全球化戰略思維，民進黨是否也應思考：「哪有能耐不接受九二共識？」

全球化是最高戰略目標，因此要加入TPP，要友善台美關係；同樣的，全球化是最高戰略目標，因此也要加入RCEP，也要優化ECFA，也要維持兩岸關係和平發展。為加入TPP，民進黨若認為犧牲豬農利益，或許可說「這個代價，台灣有能耐付出」；但民進黨亦必須嚴肅自問，若不接受九二共識，台灣將付出什麼代價？那種代價，台灣有無能耐付出？

從全球化戰略目標看，民進黨在美豬政策及九二共識的矛盾，顯見其仍然陷於一種「傾美的全球化」及「沒有中國的全球化」的重大迷思之中。在此種謬誤操作下，台灣「即使」加入了TPP（變數既大且多），卻因否定九二共識而以摧毀兩岸和平發展為代價，台灣即無可能順利完成全球化，且在兩岸鬥爭下，台灣政經體質的惡化勢將不堪想像。

僅加入TPP，不能成就台灣的全球化。例如，TPP對台灣的總貿易額占比約為卅五％，出口總額占比為卅三％；RCEP對台灣的總貿易額占比達約五六％，出口總額占比達五八％。民進黨傾美遠中的操作，不啻擺明了只想加入TPP、卻放棄RCEP。如果台灣不能加入RCEP，且ECFA又發生質變，再加上TPP萬一橫生變數，試問：台灣「哪有能耐」承受此一衝擊？

民進黨在野反美豬，執政即知「哪有能耐不開放」；民進黨在野反九二共識，如今執政亦當知「哪有能耐不接受」。台灣追求全球化，無論在經濟面或政治面，兩岸關係皆是建構全球化的脊柱條件。兩岸關係若失去九二共識的政治基礎，可能會嚴重影響台灣對內、對外整個經濟與政治生存環境。民進黨必須自問，台灣有無能耐面對不接受九二共識所可能引爆的「地動山搖」的後果？

民進黨陷於兩個矛盾。第一個矛盾是，昔日反美豬，今日哪有能耐不開放。第二個矛盾是，追求全球化，只想託庇美國，卻不惜兩岸交惡。如果因此開放了美豬，卻封堵了兩岸關係和平發展的道路，任何人皆知這必是一樁賠本生意。民進黨應當自問，「我們哪有能耐不接受九二共識？」