Sincerely Recognize the ROC Constitution, Rationally Confront Cross-Strait Conflict

Sincerely Recognize the ROC Constitution, Rationally Confront Cross-Strait Conflict
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation 
May 20, 2016 

Executive Summary: The commemorative beer bottles for Tsai Ing-wen's presidential inauguration feature digital images of her face. They have been flying off the shelves. President Tsai's cross-Strait policy is a digital image, one described as “incomplete”. As the focus is sharpened, the president's true face will be revealed. Is she sincerely honoring the constitution? Is she rationally confronting cross-Strait issues? By then the image will be fuzzy no more.

Full Text Below:

Before Tsai Ing-wen delivered her inaugural address, Beijing officials charged with Taiwan-related issues said the 1992 Consensus is a "question that must be answered". They said it was a "true or false question". Yesterday, the Office of the State Council for Taiwan Affairs said Tsai's inaugural address was “an incomplete questionnaire". President Tsai made no mention of the 1992 Consensus. She said only that she "respected the fact that in 1992 the two cross-Strait associations reached an understanding". That said, her address included other details that had other implications. One detail drew the most attention. Twice she mentioned the Republic of China Constitution. She said "The new government will be based on the Republic of China Constitution, and cross-Strait relations will be handled according to the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area”.

Therefore immediately following her address, several Mainland scholars specializing in Taiwan  issues weighed in. They interpreted her reference to the ROC Constitution as acceptance of the clause "in response to the needs of the nation prior to reunification". They interpreted her reference to the Act as acceptance of the “one nation, two areas” framework, and the “governing cross-Strait relations prior to national reunification" clause. They interpreted it as a move toward "both sides of the Strait are part of one China". Suddenly even the DPP believed the 1992 Consensus may be superseded.

As expected, five hours later Beijing's Taiwan Affairs Office issued an official press release. It demanded “recognition of the 1992 Consensus and opposition to Taiwan independence” as the shared political foundation. It said Beijing had taken note of certain relevant statements. But it also said Tsai failed to explicitly recognize the 1992 Consensus and its core meaning. It said Tsai failed to offer specific methods to ensure the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations. As a result, the tone remained grim.

In her inaugural address Tsai Ing-wen invoked constitutionalism in an effort to relieve pressure to recognize the 1992 Consensus. She listed two details in an effort to build trust and establish a shared political foundation.

Politically, her address mentioned the East China Sea and South China Sea issues. She said "I was elected president in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of China. I have a responsibility to defend the territory and sovereignty of the Republic of China." That was significant.

Economically, she expressed willingness to participate in the RCEP. She said "We would like to participate with the other side on issues related to regional development, and seek opportunities to cooperate and work together." This too was significant.

President Tsai failed to alleviate Beijing's concerns. The 1992 Consensus remains an unresolved red vs green matter. No one knows how it will end. In fact, when it comes to the 1992 Consensus, Beijing long ago seized the initiative. It continues reeling the DPP in. Beijing issues questionnaires. Tsai Ing-wen fills them in. When Tsai Ing-wen cozied up to the "Republic of China Constitution", she should have simply proceeded to recognize a "constitutional one China”, “one China, two areas”, and “one China, different interpretations". Sadly, she ducked the issue of the 1992 Consensus yet again. Therefore no matter how she answers, Beijing will consider it "incomplete".

Beijing has made its position clear. Without the 1992 Consensus, the matter remains unresolved. The Tsai government must either cave in, or prepare for a never ending war of nerves. The only way out is unequivocal support for a "constitutional one China", and "one China, different interpretations”. That being the case, why not simply accept the 1992 Consensus?

The situation is critical. But a glimmer of hope remains. Beijing has not closed the door on constitutionalism. It merely said that the answer was incomplete. Meanwhile, President Tsai seeks a way out through the ROC Constitution. If she can clearly declare that she supports "a constitutional one China", she may be able to "solve the problem". The formula “one China, different interpretations” may still have some life left in it.

Before she delivered her inaugural address, the Tsai regime said “The new government's future political stance will be based on sincerity and rationality". Cross-Strait relations are currently unpredictable. We urge the new government to sincerely honor the constitution, and rationally confront cross-Strait issues.

First take the matter of sincerity. Her address showed that President Cai realizes she cannot jettison the constitution. When Chen Shui-bian said in reference to de jure Taiwan independence, that "Impossible means impossible!”, that was sincerity. When DPP party insiders proposed freezing the Taiwan independence party platform, that was sincerity. President Tsai has pledged to honor the constitution and to speak with sincerity. If so, she can no longer harbor fantasies of "backdoor listing". She must sincerely embrace the Republic of China Constitution, and accept the ROC Constitution's shelter and protection. Next, take the matter of rationality. Rationality means forgoing the use of such expressions as "pandering to China and selling out Taiwan" to tear the current generation apart. It means forgoing the use of such expressions as "natural Taiwan independence" to pigeonhole the next generation. It means resorting to rational debate rather than populist demagoguery. It means establishing a cross-Strait framework conducive to a peaceful win/win relationship.

The commemorative beer bottles for Tsai Ing-wen's presidential inauguration feature digital images of her face. They have been flying off the shelves. President Tsai's cross-Strait policy is a digital image, one described as “incomplete”. As the focus is sharpened, the president's true face will be revealed. Is she sincerely honoring the constitution? Is she rationally confronting cross-Strait issues? By then the image will be fuzzy no more.

誠實接納憲法 冷靜面對兩岸
2016-05-21 聯合報

在蔡英文總統發表就職演說前，北京涉台人士說，九二共識是「必答題」，且為「是非題」。昨天，國台辦對這篇演說的回應是：「這是一份沒有完成的答卷。」
蔡總統未提九二共識，僅重申「尊重一九九二年兩岸兩會達成的共同認知與諒解」等等；但演說亦有幾處細節似另有寓意，最受注意的是，有兩次提及中華民國憲法，如「新政府會依據中華民國憲法、兩岸人民關係條例處理兩岸事務」。

因而，演說後的第一時間，有幾位大陸涉台權威學者將「憲法」解讀為接受了「因應國家統一前的需要」，將「條例」解讀為在一國兩區的架構下「規範國家統一前兩岸人民往來」，並視此為靠近「兩岸一中」。一時之間，連民進黨方面也認為，九二共識可視為就此退場。

詎料，五個小時後，北京國台辦發布了正式新聞稿，破題即指出「堅持九二共識，反對台獨」的共同政治基礎，並稱雖然注意到演說的相關論述，但沒有明確承認九二共識及認同其核心內涵，也未提出確保兩岸關係和平發展的具體方法，言語依然嚴峻。

蔡英文在演說中，努力以「憲法說」化解「九二共識」的壓力，她且安排了兩處細節，均在顯示重建雙方互信及共同政治基礎的善意：

政治面：演說論及東海及南海問題稱：「我依照中華民國憲法當選總統，我有責任捍衛中華民國的領土和主權。」此可視為有意義的訊息。

經濟面：演說表達了參與ＲＣＥＰ的意願，並稱：「我們也願和對岸就共同參與區域發展的相關議題，尋求各種合作與協力的可能性。」此語似為心跡的表達。

但是，蔡總統的這些用心，並未完全解除北京的戒心。九二共識仍將是兩岸紅綠之間的懸案，不知伊於胡底。其實，在九二共識這個議題上，北京始終操主動地位，不斷誘使民進黨進入口袋。北京是批卷者，蔡英文是答卷者。當蔡英文向「中華民國憲法」靠近，其實她應當已是默認了「憲法一中／一國兩區／一中各表」；然而，她又閃避「九二共識」，所以她不論如何作答，皆會被北京指為「沒有完成」的答卷。

北京的姿態已經擺明，沒有九二共識不能了結。蔡政府除非準備破局，或打算迎對沒完沒了的神經戰，其出路應在再將「憲法一中」的內涵具體表明，並以「一中各表」來平衡情勢。然而，倘若走到那一步，為何不接受九二共識？

事態發展至如此嚴峻的地步，卻似有一點可以期待之處。北京仍未封閉「憲法說」，只稱答卷未完成；而蔡總統亦努力在中華民國憲法找出路。倘若說清楚「憲法一中」就能如蔡總統所說的「解決問題」，也許未來「一中各表」的議題仍然具有發展性。

在就職演說發表前，蔡團隊稱，演說將把「未來政府的政治定位在誠實、冷靜的特色之上」。在兩岸關係陷入莫測的此時，我們對新政府的建議是：誠實接納憲法，冷靜面對兩岸。

一、誠實：演說顯示，蔡總統體認到憲法不可離棄。陳水扁說「做不到就是做不到」，即是一種誠實，民進黨內「凍結台獨黨綱」的倡議也是一種誠實。蔡總統既表態回歸憲法，誠實，就是不再存有「借殼上市」的遐想，而誠實接納中華民國憲法所給的承當，也誠實接受中華民國憲法所給的庇護與保障。二、冷靜：就是勿再用「傾中賣台」去撕裂這一代，也勿再用「天然獨」去框限下一代，理智而非民粹，同創一個共生雙贏的兩岸和平互動架構。

總統就職紀念啤酒，以數位馬賽克呈現蔡英文總統的頭像而狂賣。其實，昨日蔡總統的兩岸論述也如一幅數位馬賽克，因而被稱為「沒有完成的答卷」；但當焦點逐漸對準，總統的面容終必真實呈現，是否誠實接納憲法、是否冷靜面對兩岸，就大概不再能有馬賽克的朦朧了。