National Security Council Can No Longer Remain a Loose Cannon

National Security Council Can No Longer Remain a Loose Cannon
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
July 17, 2016

Executive Summary: When Tsai Ing-wen first assumed the presidency, she  was desperate to win public trust in the DPP government. Therefore she vowed to maintain the status quo, to comply with the provisions and amendments of the ROC Constitution. These include the "Act Governing Relations Between People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area", and constitutional interpretations pertaining to cross-Strait relations. She hoped to ensure "sustainable, incident-free", peaceful and stable cross-Strait relations, and assured everyone during her inaugural address that "We are ready."

Full Text Below:

When Tsai Ing-wen first assumed the presidency, she  was desperate to win public trust in the DPP government. Therefore she vowed to maintain the status quo, to comply with the provisions and amendments of the ROC Constitution. These include the "Act Governing Relations Between People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area", and constitutional interpretations pertaining to cross-Strait relations. She hoped to ensure "sustainable, incident-free", peaceful and stable cross-Strait relations, and assured everyone during her inaugural address that "We are ready."

But the new regime has been in power nearly two months. Six months, if one begins counting from the DPP's election victory. The record of the Tsai regime's national security team has been even worse than Cabinet Chief Lin Chuan's characterization of “utter chaos”. Former National Security Council Secretary-General Su Chi and other National Security Council members from the Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian eras, have expressed grave concerns. They fear that afraid peace in the Taiwan Strait may be set back, or even go from Cold Peace to Cold Confrontation, even to Cold War. Taiwan's prosperity, even its survival, could be at risk.

The Hague “ruling” on the South China Sea was extremely unfavorable. The Tsai regime's national security team was unprepared. When the “ruling” was announced, it lacked any prepared response. It even withdrew our Coast Guard cutters before the announcement, then redispatched warships to the region in a panic. The entire procedure, from beginning to end, was a fiasco. Fortunately, once the “ruling” was announced, the Tsai regime issued a righteous declaration regarding the ROC's sovereignty over islands in the South China Sea, including Taiping Island. It belatedly restored a degree of public confidence in the Tsai regime. The Mainland expressed the same sentiments, and established a fragile basis for cross-Strait interaction and trust, the first since May 20.

But the South China Sea issue requires more than Tsai Ing-wen standing on the deck of the Kangding class Dihua cruiser and making pro forma speeches. Above all the National Security Council must formulate strategic plans. For example, on the South China Sea issue, the two sides need military confidence building measures. We must link the historical 11 dashed line to our sovereignty over Taiping Island. We must link it to “one China” under which sovereignty is unified even though jurisdiction is divided. This does not detract from the reality of Republic of China sovereignty. In fact, it is entirely consistent with Article 4 of the Constitution, which speaks to "inherent territory". This is entirely consistent with the spirit of the 1992 Consensus, and has positive implications for cross-Strait relations.

Furthermore, the South China Sea is the Republic of China's strategic domain, and a symbol of the two sides shared heritage. The Tsai regime national security team cannot see the forest for the trees. It is preoccupied with distancing itself from Ma Ying-jeou's "East China Sea Peace Initiative". It is determined to curry favor with the United States and Japan, while distancing itself from Mainland China. In the process however, it is undermining our national sovereignty and the rights of Taiwan fishermen in our islands' Exclusive Economic Zones. It is also missing an historic opportunity to re-establish trust with the Mainland.

At a deeper level, the key to peaceful cross-Strait relations is whether the national security team can put people first, and get past its "If Ma Ying-jeou did it, then it must be wrong" attitude. It must cease demonizing the 1992 Consensus and turning the 1992 Consensus into an insurmountable barrier.

The National Security Council is the president's advisory body on national security policy. But the National Security Bureau is part of the National Security Council. Therefore "consultation" has a very broad meaning. It includes national strategic planning, defense policy and strategy, national crisis prevention, crisis management, counter-terrorism, as well as post-crisis damage control and communications. According to the Organic Law for the National Security Council, it is the body by which a civilian president commands the military, makes military preparations, wages wars and ends wars. It is an important national security entity whose importance is self-evident.

But with the exception of NSB Chief Yang Kuo-chiang, Tsai Ing-wen's national security team, who are the other members? Are they qualified in national security, national defense strategy, the organization of a professional military? Take the current national security team members for example. National Security Council Secretary-General Joseph Wu and two deputy secretary-generals, along with Advisory Committee members are DPP elites. But can they transcend the DPP's narrow mindset, and put national survival and security strategy ahead of partisan political advantage? So far all they have done is hold forth on "Taiwan warships made by Taiwan. Taiwan warplanes made by Taiwan”. Would such projects be money pits? Would they be pragmatic and feasible? That remains to be seen.

Minister of Defense Feng Shi-kuan is now far removed from national security matters. The “little white dog” animal abuse case, and the Hsiung Feng III missile launch fiasco, highlighted the Tsai regime's incompetence. Has this led to a rare consensus in public opinion? Tsai Ing-wen's handling of the matter has undermined the prestige of the commander in chief and the morale of our nation's military.

President Tsai rarely had any contact with the nation's military in the past. Upon taking office she conduced inspections. Her public statements about the military have been measured. But as far as stabilizing the military, boosting morale, restoring discipline, she still has a long way to go.

Therefore we propose the following. First, Tsai must reorganize the national security team, including the Minister of Defense. Those who need to be replaced, must be replaced. Professionalism and performance must take precedence. They must trump DPP ideology. Appointments must not be a matter of political patronage.

Second, if for the sake of Taiwan's survival and the well-being of the public the Tsai regime must make a complete flip-flop, why not? The national security team should help President Tsai find a way out of her self-imposed "1992 Consensus" quagmire. It should use the South China Sea and Taiping Island issues to build cross-Strait trust. As soon as possible, Tsai should arrange to set foot on Taiping Island and declare our sovereignty.

Third, Tsai must fully implement a National Security Council crisis management mechanism. Restore the office of National Security Council spokesman. Integrate it with the Ministry of Defense, the National Security Bureau, and National Police Administration crisis prevention and communication mechanisms.

"Consulting masters ensures victory. Consulting novices ensures defeat". President Tsai Ing-wen's appointees to the national security team will determine victory or defeat. It all hinges on her whims.

國安團隊不能再荒腔走板
2016/7/17 中國時報

蔡總統當選之初信誓旦旦，要讓台灣人民信任民進黨政府，宣稱將以維持現狀，遵守《中華民國憲法》、憲法增修條文、《兩岸人民關係條例》和大法官釋憲案等作為兩岸關係的規範，以建立「可持續、沒有意外」和平穩定的兩岸關係。她在就職演說中展現了十足的自信，矢言「我們準備好了」。

但新政府上台已近2個月，加上勝選後的執政準備，其實已有半年之久，國安團隊的實際表現，卻比林全內閣的「離離落落」有過之而無不及，前國安會祕書長蘇起及多位李、扁時代的國安人士，都表達對國安團隊的憂心，唯恐台海和平發展倒退，甚至於由冷對抗墜落至綜合性的對立，乃至於冷戰，陷台灣生存發展於險境。

南海仲裁結果對我方極為不利，蔡政府國安團隊事前全無掌握，亦未針對可能情境擬妥備案，以至發生仲裁結果宣布前撤回海巡艦，宣布後又匆匆派出軍艦趕往巡弋的荒腔走板事件。所幸結果出爐後，蔡政府對包括太平島在內的南海諸島為我國固有領土作理直氣壯的立場宣示，總算讓國人稍許恢復對蔡政府的信心，中國大陸也表達同聲一氣的態度，成為520兩岸重啟互動、建立薄弱互信的契機。

不過，南海問題的後續，絕不止於蔡英文登上康定級迪化艦說說場面話而已，最重要的是，國安會是否有進一步的戰略規畫，諸如以南海問題，作為兩岸架構軍事互信的起點，將歷史既有的11段線連結太平島的主權隸屬，既含括兩岸分裂分治前的「一中」，也無損於現實的中華民國主權，更合乎憲法第4條「固有之疆域」與九二共識的精神，對兩岸關係尤有正面的意義。

進一步言，南海是中華民國的主權、戰略要域，更是兩岸共同祖產的象徵，蔡政府國安團隊絕不能見樹不見林，只為與馬英九先前的「東海和平倡議」切割，或為了討好美、日而避諱和大陸立場相近，損害國家主權經濟海域與漁民權益，將錯失與大陸重新建立互信的歷史機遇。

更深入地說，兩岸關係能否和平發展的關鍵，即在於國安團隊是否能以國家、人民為重，是否能走出「凡馬英九皆錯」的迷思，不要再汙名化九二共識，而自陷於與九二共識僅咫尺之隔的困境。

國安會是總統有關國家安全政策的諮詢機關，但由於國安局隸屬於國安會之下，故所謂「諮詢」，其實有十分寬廣的範疇，具體而言，凡國家戰略規畫、國防政策與戰略，包括國家危機預防、危機處理與反恐，以及國家發生危機後的損害管制、危機傳播等。就國安會組織法及職權而言，國安會其實是文人總統領軍，建軍備戰、啟戰、止戰，管控國家安全的重要機制，其重要性不言可喻。

但令人疑慮的是，蔡英文所任命的國安團隊，除國安局長楊國強外，其他成員是否具備國家安全、國防戰略、建軍備戰所需的專業？就現有的國安會成員而言，祕書長吳釗燮及二位副祕書長、諮詢委員等人皆為民進黨精英，但是否能走出民進黨的窠臼，以國家的高度規擘台灣生存發展安全的戰略，迄今為止，除「國艦國造、國機國造」外，乏善可陳，而上述政策是否為錢坑，是否務實可行，亦待檢驗。

國防部長馮世寬早已遠離國防安全實務，他在小白狗虐死案與雄三誤射事件中的荒腔走板表現，是否稱職亦成為朝野及輿論難得一致的共識，蔡英文對其「留校察看」，其實有損三軍統帥的威信與國軍士氣。

另方面，過去與國軍鮮少接觸的蔡總統，雖然在上任後多次視察三軍部隊，發表的談話也四平八穩，但距離穩定軍心、提振士氣、重建軍紀，卻尚遙遠。

因此，我們提出以下建議：其一，重整國安團隊成員，包括國防部長在內，該換則換，以專業及功能考量，超越民進黨意識型態，而非酬庸安插。

其二，為了台灣生存發展，並以全民福祉為念，縱使「髮夾彎」必須轉彎又何妨？國安團隊應協助蔡總統走出「九二共識」的困境，研擬以南海太平島作為建立兩岸互信的槓桿，並盡速安排蔡英文登上太平島，宣示主權。

其三，充實國安會危機處理機制，包括恢復國安會發言人的機制，整合國防部、國安局及警政署等對重大維安事件的預防與危機傳播。

「用師則王，用徒則亡」，蔡英文總統所任命的國安團隊關係國家興替安危，師徒之分，在於蔡總統的一念之間。