Frank Hsieh Returns: Pipe Dream or Dream Come True?

Frank Hsieh Returns: Pipe Dream or Dream Come True?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 8, 2012

Summary: Frank Hsieh has returned from his visit to the Mainland. His "trail-blazing journey" is either a conclusion or a commencement. Is it the former, or the latter? That depends on whether he becomes Chairman of the DPP's China Affairs Committee. That will determine whether Frank Hsieh's dream is a pipe dream or a dream come true.

Full Text below:

Frank Hsieh has returned from his visit to the Mainland. His "trail-blazing journey" is either a conclusion or a commencement. Is it the former, or the latter? That depends on whether he becomes Chairman of the DPP's China Affairs Committee. That will determine whether Frank Hsieh's dream is a pipe dream or a dream come true.

As matters stand, Frank Hsieh and Su Tseng-chang have been "taking the point." They can only move forward. Withdrawal means disaster. Frank Hsieh has made a beginning. Can he use the China Affairs Committee as a platform by which to transform the DPP's cross-Strait thinking, and connect with the Mainland? He spoke of "my footprints, my descendant's path." Can he turn the former into the latter? If he cannot, then the link will be broken. Worse, he will probably become the target of public villification amidst party power struggles. Frank Hsieh's visit has provided the DPP with the leverage it needs for its transformation. Su Tseng-chang must take maximum advantage of it. He must help Frank Hsieh become Chairman of the China Affairs Committee, thereby promoting the transformation of the DPP. He must not exploit Hsieh's visit to the Mainland as an opportunity to attack his rivals. That would divide the DPP. That would amount to an admission that the DPP's hoped for transformation is a pipe dream. Hsieh and Su must now become symbiotes. They can only move forward. Withdrawal means disaster.

The two sides now see Frank Hsieh's Chairmanship of the DPP's China Affairs Committee as an indicator of the DPP's desire to undergo transformation. If Frank Hsieh wants his visit to be a commencement and not a conclusion, he must accept this job position. Su Tseng-chang may be unwilling to risk attacks for promoting party transformation. But he he must stick to his promise to help Frank Hsieh become committee chairman. The boost Frank Hsieh has received from crossing the Strait has made him more determined to assume this position.

Suppose Frank Hsieh becomes Chairman of the DPP's China Affairs Committee. How will Su and Hsieh spin Hsieh's recent "exports cum domestic sales" visit to the Mainland? How will they transform it into official DPP policy? What did Frank Hsieh say to the Mainland side during his visit? That has yet to be made public. But two basic points can be discerned from what has already been repeated in public. One. Consider history and kinship. Frank Hsieh visited his ancestral home and sought out his roots. He said "It was like visiting his brother's house." He said "All our ancestors are Chinese." In fact, the ancestral hall Frank Hsieh visited displayed the gift Hsieh gave them last year -- a plaque reading "treasured tree, shared roots." The term "bao shu" or "treasured tree" is the Hsieh family "tang hao," a name indicating ancestral place of origin. The plaque had a double meaning. Two. Consider political coopetition. Frank Hsieh's core premise is that "Cross-Strait relations must be rooted in the Constitution of the Republic of China." This has largely been affirmed by think tanks on the other side. It is reminiscent of Hsieh's declaration that "The DPP is no longer promoting Taiwan independence." It also focuses the other side's attention on the Constitution of the Republic of China, making it the basis for cross-Strait coopetition. This amounts to a declaration that Taiwan independence is retiring from the political stage and bidding it farewell. This is a step forward for the Republic of China. This means that Blue, Green, and Red parties on both sides of Strait may be able to reach a consensus on the "Republic of China" and the "Constitution of the Republic of China."

The Blue and Green camps should agree to make the Constitution of the Republic of China the basis for cross-Strait coopetition. This would make it even more difficult for Beijing to repudiate the Constitution of the Republic of China. Frank Hsieh crossed the Strait to proclaim that the DPP is willing to reaffirm the Constitution of the Republic of China. This is his contribution to Taiwan, the Republic of China, and to cross-Strait relations.

Frank Hsieh has been making waves. The DPP has had to adapt. The Blue and Green parties on Taiwan have had to adapt. The Blue, Green, and Red parties on both sides of the Strait have had to adapt, and enter a new era. For example, Frank Hsieh knocked on the Mainland's door. He spoke of "treasured tree, shared roots," and a "one China Constitution." The other side expressed approval of the direction Hsieh was taking. But it also stressed that party to party exchanges were impossible until the DPP relinquished its Taiwan independence party platform. This will require a long accommodation process.

We published an editorial in the September 11 edition expressing our views on the new DPP/CCP coopetition. As we see it, Beijing's cross-Strait policy has three elements. They are: opposition to Taiwan independence, support for the 1992 consensus, and support for the one China framework. Frank Hsieh has countered with his "one China Constitution, which forsakes Taiwan independence, and "different constitutions, different interpretations." This is the same as "one China, different interpretations," or "one China is the Republic of China." This is the same as "Kaohsiung and Xiamen are two cities within the same country," or "one country, two regions." Beijing may make future demands regarding the "one China framework." The DPP can respond with the "Big Roof China" concept. The Republic of China is part of a "treasured tree, shared roots." The DPP can boldy proclaim that the Republic of China is the China of the common people. The Republic of China is democratic China.

Frank Hsieh visited Xiamen and paid his respects to his ancestors. He said "It was as if his blood was boiling." Several times he wiped away tears -- the tears of a grown man. Frank Hsieh has experienced many ups and downs in his political career. He lamented 30 plus years of Blue vs. Green, reunification vs. independence struggles. Will his five days and four nights "trail-blazing journey" be a commencement or a conclusion? That will depend on whether is becomes Chairman of the DPP's China Affairs Committee.

Ultimately, the Chairmanship of the Democratic Progressive Party's China Affairs Committee is nearer and dearer to him than the Hsieh family ancestral altar in Xiamen. If Frank Hsieh takes office, the first thing he may wish to do is change the name of the "China Affairs Committee" to the "Cross-Strait Affairs Committee," or the "Straits Affairs Committee."

謝長廷歸來：黃粱一夢或化夢成真
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.10.08

謝長廷今日訪陸歸來。他的「開展」之旅，將就此「關閉」，或繼續「開展」，關鍵在於他能否出任民進黨「中國事務委員會」主任委員。這將是決定謝長廷此行只是黃粱一夢或能化夢成真的關鍵性拐點。

事態發展至今，謝長廷與蘇貞昌皆成了過河卒子；只能向前，退必凶。謝長廷的「開展」，如果不能藉「中國事務委員會」的平台，與民進黨的兩岸轉型接軌，不但他「今日我足跡，未來後人路」的路徑圖就此出現斷點，甚且可能成為黨內惡鬥的眾矢之的；而謝長廷此行所作的布置，儼然已成為民進黨欲轉型的最佳槓桿，蘇貞昌如果不能因勢利導，將謝長廷扶上「中國事務委員會」主委一職，藉此推動民進黨轉型，反而縱容謝的訪陸之行成為民進黨內訌分裂的題材，即不啻宣告民進黨的轉型已不可寄望。因此，謝蘇二人此時在某種意義上已是生命共同體，只能向前，退必凶。

此時，兩岸之間皆將謝長廷能否出任「中國事務委員會」主委，視為民進黨是否將會轉型的指標。謝長廷若不願其標舉的「開展」就此「關閉」，他就必須出任此職；而蘇貞昌若不願背上抗拒轉型的惡名，他也必須照原定約諾扶謝長廷就職。謝長廷此行渡海獲得的能量，更使他對此一職位志在必得。

如果謝長廷能出任「中國事務委員會」主委，接下來就看蘇謝二人如何將謝長廷此行「出口轉內銷」的兩岸論述，轉化成為民進黨的官方政策。謝長廷此行對大陸方面作了什麼表態，迄未完全公開；但就其反覆公開陳述的觀點，可以歸納為兩條脈絡：一、就歷史及血緣的脈絡言，謝長廷的謁祖尋根，「像是到了兄弟家」，表示他主張「大家的祖先都是中國人」；其實，謝長廷此次前去的宗祠，早已掛著他去年所贈的匾牌「寶樹同根」，「寶樹」是謝姓堂號，一語雙關。二、就政治競合的脈絡言，謝長廷「依據中華民國憲法因應兩岸關係」（憲法一中）的論述主軸，在大體上受到對岸智庫的肯定；這不但形同是「民進黨不再搞台獨」的宣示，抑且也將對岸拉到「中華民國憲法」的政治座標上，使兩岸關係能以「中華民國憲法」為競合準據，這是台獨的退場宣示，亦是「中華民國」的進取；顯示在兩岸的藍綠紅三黨之間，皆可能建立以「中華民國」及「中華民國憲法」為「底線」的共識。

如果台灣的藍綠全民皆能以「中華民國憲法」為兩岸競合的準則，北京即更加不能否定「中華民國憲法」的準據地位；而謝長廷此次渡海若是在宣示民進黨也願意加強鞏固「中華民國憲法」的底線力道，這應可視為他對台灣、中華民國及兩岸關係的貢獻。

謝長廷吹縐一池春水，已使民進黨內部的磨合，台灣藍綠的磨合，及兩岸藍綠紅的磨合進入了新階段。例如，謝長廷以「寶樹同根」與「憲法一中」到對岸敲門；而對岸雖對謝個人的論述「方向」表示接受，但亦回以「民進黨不放棄《台獨黨綱》，不可能黨對黨交流」，這些皆須有長久的磨合過程。

我們曾在九月十一日社論，對民進黨與北京的新競合關係表達看法，那就是：北京的兩岸政策三元素是「反對台獨／九二共識／一中框架」；謝長廷提出的對策則是「憲法一中（放棄台獨）／憲法各表（即『一中各表』或『一個中國是中華民國』，或高雄、廈門是『一國兩市』、『一國兩區』）」。至於未來進一步面對北京「一中框架」的訴求，我們認為，民進黨亦可用「大屋頂中國」來回應，亦即面對「寶樹同根」的「庶民中國」勇敢地主張：中華民國是民主中國。

謝長廷廈門謁祖，自稱「好像血液在沸騰」，並幾度拭淚。這一抆男兒淚，應是謝長廷自傷跌宕起伏的政治生涯，且慨嘆三十餘年來藍綠統獨之爭的痛苦卻虛無。這五天四夜的「開展」之旅，須待他出掌民進黨「中國事務委員會」，始有可能繼續「展開」。

畢竟，民進黨黨部「中國事務委員會」裡的那一把椅子，比廈門的謝氏祖先祭桌要近得多。如果謝長廷能走馬上任，第一件事，他可能是希望把「中國事務委員會」改成「兩岸事務委員會」，或「海峽事務委員會」。