We Look Forward to the DPP Actually Defending the ROC National Flag

We Look Forward to the DPP Actually Defending the ROC National Flag
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 1, 2012

Summary: The London Olympics has opened to much fanfare. At such a moment the ruling and opposition parties ought to demonstrate unity. But politicians on Taiwan are nothing if not quarrelsome. The Republic of China national flag was unexpectedly taken down on London's Regent Street. This touched off a ruling vs. opposition party war of words. Saliva flew. But if this flag can make the DPP examine its own position, maybe it was a good thing.

Full Text below:

The London Olympics has opened to much fanfare. At such a moment the ruling and opposition parties ought to demonstrate unity. But politicians on Taiwan are nothing if not quarrelsome. The Republic of China national flag was unexpectedly taken down on London's Regent Street. This touched off a ruling vs. opposition party war of words. Saliva flew. But if this flag can make the DPP examine its own position, maybe it was a good thing.

Ideally in politics, political parties will argue among themselves at home, but will maintain a united front in international diplomatic venues. Hopefully they will pull together, or at least avoid badmouthing each other in public. Recently Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney visited Israel. His purpose was to highlight his qualifications as a national leader. But while in Israel. he challenged the policies of U.S. President Barack Obama. He unwittingly touched a raw nerve in Middle East politics. He violated the rule that American politicians must not criticize their own government's policies while abroad. If his trip is deemed "international politics for domestic consumption," it may hurt Romney's election prospects.

Unfortunately, Taiwan has a long tradition of running off and crying to foreigners. This was perhaps understandable under martial law. But it has actually worsened since democratization. Our diplomatic plight has not unified the ruling and opposition parties. On the contrary, it has become a bone of contention. It has become a weapon to attack one's opponent. Su Tseng-chang blasted the KMT. He accused the KMT of failing to defend the ROC national flag. Although he was sounding off at home, he was touching on Taiwan's complex international plight.

Su Tseng-chang's "defend the flag" rhetoric is nothing new. Whenever the ROC national flag is forcibly taken down in an international venue. the pro-Taiwan independence Democratic Progressive Party inevitably opens fire. In fact, the DPP's behavior is a classic case of "waving the national flag to oppose the national flag." The DPP remains mired in the martial law era. It still equates the ROC national flag with the KMT party flag. It contemptuously refers to it as the "automotive wheel brand flag." In recent years, the ROC national flag has become the common denominator in Taiwan society. The Green Camp puts on a show of "defending the flag." But in its heart of hearts, it is actually attempting to undermine the Republic of China. What it really means is that "Your automotive wheel brand flag has been rejected by the international community!"

Su Tseng-chang's "defend the flag" rhetoric was a little different from previous Green Camp rhetoric. Writing in FaceBook, he said, "The flag is the symbol of the nation. Those who love this country must defend its dignity." This remark is not wrong. So why has it provoked such widespread controversy?

The answer is obvious, Political parties and politicians should say what they mean, and mean what they say. Su Tseng-chang loudly proclaimed his desire to defend the dignity of the flag. But one never sees a single ROC national flag at DPP mass rallies. One cannot find a single ROC national flag at DPP headquarters. How can Su Tseng-chang convince anyone he is really defending the ROC national flag?

The KMT has criticized him for this. What was Su Tseng-chang's response? He said that at home people may have different views of the national flag. He said this was the natural result of having a democratic and pluralistic society. He said that abroad however, we must defend the national flag. Frankly this rhetoric was highly dubious. The DPP was in office for eight years. Chen Shui-bian was not the "President of Taiwan." He was the President of the Republic of China. The Democratic Progressive Party has already accepted the national flag, the national anthem, and various national symbols. What "different views on the national flag" are there to talk about? If some political parties refuse to grant the ROC national flag the dignity it deserves on Taiwan, how can they demand that others grant it dignity on the international stage?

Most people do not flaunt the symbols of their nation in their daily lives. Most citizens' patriotism is reactive in nature. Someone from the Taiwan Region of the Republic of China may achieve some sort of international recognition. The Republic of China may experience some sort of setback. At times such as these, people are moved when they see the flag. The London Olympics flag removal incident attracted public attention. The reason was that most people consider the ROC flag the symbol of our nation. The Democratic Progressive Party talks about creating a national consensus. Yet it remains blind to this very consensus.

To be fair, Su Tseng-chang's attitude has changed somewhat. He recently attended a Junior Chamber of Commerce meeting. He joined Junior Chamber of Commerce members in bowing before the ROC national flag and Sun Yat-sen's portrait three times. This is still rare among DPP officials. Therefore, we would like to believe that Su Tseng-chang's remarks were not hypocrital or opportunisitic. Can the DPP rid itself of its rigid ideology? Over the past few years the party has become increasingly extremist. Naturally everyone is adopting a wait and see attitude.

The DPP must remember we can only have one national flag, just as we can only have one Republic of China. Our nation must endure hardships in the international arena. But the DPP and the public on Taiwan. have no other choice. We must defend the ROC national flag. We must enable the Republic of China take its place on the international stage, and find its place in the international community.

期待民進黨真心維護國旗

    2012-08-01
    中國時報

倫敦奧運熱熱鬧鬧展開，這應該是朝野政黨展現團結的最佳時機，但是台灣政客無所不吵，倫敦攝政街上意外掛出的中華民國國旗，也引發一場朝野口水戰。口水如昔，但這一面國旗如果能讓民進黨深刻思考自身的定位，未嘗不是一件好事。

在理想政治中，大家總是期待，政黨在國內吵歸吵，一到國際外交場合，就必須同心一志，至少要避免口出惡言；就以美國共和黨總統參選人羅姆尼此次外交之旅為例，他原有意藉此來凸顯作為國家領導人的條件。但是訪問以色列時，不但挑戰美國總統歐巴馬的政策，又不小心觸動中東政治敏感神經，更破壞了美國政治人物不在國外批評自家政策的慣例。這樣的外交行若被評為「國際政治、國內消費」，只怕對羅姆尼的選情未必有幫助。

很不幸的是，台灣向來有告洋狀的傳統，那也許是戒嚴時期的不得不然，但是民主化以來，情況愈演愈烈。艱難的外交處境，不但沒有使朝野更團結，反而是衝突點，或是拿來攻擊對手的利器。此次蘇貞昌痛批國民黨沒有維護國旗，他雖在國內發言，但他觸及的就是台灣複雜的國際處境了。

坦白說，蘇貞昌這番「護旗論」並不新鮮。過去，只要中華民國國旗在國際場被強制撤下，獨派或民進黨人士必然發言批評；但這其實是「打著國旗反國旗」。他們仍停留在戒嚴時間，將國旗等同國民黨的黨旗，甚至鄙夷的稱之為「車輪牌旗」。近年來，國旗逐漸成為台灣社會的公約數，綠營的「護旗」之舉，骨子裡其實是反對中華民國，真正意在言外的是：「你們這面車輪牌的國旗，在國際社會上還不是走不出去！」

和綠營人士過去的發言比起來，蘇貞昌這次的「護旗論」有些不同。他在臉書上說：「國旗是國家的象徵，愛這個國家就要為這面國旗爭取尊嚴。」此言不差，但為何還是引來各界質疑？

答案很明顯，政黨或政治人物都必須言行一致，當蘇貞昌口口聲聲維護國旗尊嚴時，民進黨的群眾運動中卻從來都看不到一面國旗，甚至在中央黨部也找不到一面國旗時，蘇貞昌如何讓人相信，他是真心護旗？

面對國民黨批評，蘇貞昌的回應是，國內也許對國旗有不同的看法與意見，這是民主多元社會的自然現象，但在國外，當然要維護。坦白說，這段話也是問題百出，試想，民進黨曾經八年執政，陳水扁可不是當台灣國總統，而是中華民國總統；理論上，民進黨對國旗、國歌這些國家象徵都已概括承受，為何還會對國旗有不同意見？如果在台灣的政黨都不願賦予國旗尊嚴，這面國旗在國際場合又怎麼會有尊嚴？

其實，一般人不會在日常生活中時時刻刻展示國家的象徵。國民對國家的愛都是防衛性的，只有當台灣在國際揚名，或是外交受挫的時刻，人民才會深深的受國旗感動。這次倫敦奧運撤旗事件之所以眾所矚目，最關鍵原因在於，多數民眾都認同中華民國國旗正是國家的象徵。口口聲聲要凝聚台灣共識的民進黨，顯然還沒有看清楚這一點。

持平而言，蘇貞昌的態度確實正在微調。他日前出席青商會活動時，公開與青商會員一同向國旗暨國父遺像行三鞠躬禮，這在民進黨要員中仍然極為少見。因此，我們寧願相信，蘇貞昌這番言論並非虛情假意，或是見縫插針。但是，民進黨是否就此擺脫僵固的意識形態，鑑於該黨這幾年極端化的作為，大家理所當然還要長期觀察。

也許，民進黨該記住的是，我們只能有一面國旗，正如同我們只能有一個中華民國。她在國際上走得步履艱辛，但是民進黨和所有台灣人民一樣，已經別無選擇，不但要愛護國旗，也要讓中華民國能夠走下去，在國際社會找到空間！