Will Frank Hsieh Succeed Su Tseng-chang as Party Chairman?

Will Frank Hsieh Succeed Su Tseng-chang as Party Chairman?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
April 1, 2013

Summary: DPP official Albert Wu says that if Su Tseng-chang clings to his "anti-China" path, he will face a severe test next year during the party chairman election. He could be replaced by Frank Hsieh, who continues to "Move Forward."

Full text below:

DPP official Albert Wu says that if Su Tseng-chang clings to his "anti-China" path, he will face a severe test next year during the party chairman election. He could be replaced by Frank Hsieh, who continues to "Move Forward."

Such reports could be true, or they could be media spin control. But they reveals a surging undercurrent. The term for DPP Chairman is two years. Su Tseng-chang was elected last year. His term will expire in May of next year. Last year during party chairman elections, the seven in one elections were approaching. Therefore some proposed that the term for the new party chairman be extended until the seven in one elections are over. But no decision has been reached. If the current situation continues, by this time next year, as Albert Wu noted, it will be time for the election of a new party chairman.

Recently Albert Wu traveled to Pingtan to participate in a "Cross-Strait Relations Seminar." Just before his departure, he said the DPP must break the KMT's cross-Strait monopoly. He said that given the currents of history, if Su Tseng-chang remains "hostile toward Mainland China," then Frank Hsieh will be elected DPP chairman. This "appears to be inevitable."

Former DPP legislator Julian J. Kuo, who also participated in the Pingtan meeting, said the DPP must achieve a breakthrough in cross-Strait relations. But Party Chairman Su Tseng-chang appears to have no desire to do so. "If the China Affairs Committee were led by Frank Hsieh, the current situation would be very different."

Julian Kuo and Albert Wu are controversial figures within the DPP. They may not reflect the thinking of the Democratic Progressive Party leadership. But they do reflect the thinking of the younger generation reformers. Albert Wu said "Su Tseng-chang sees [Mainland] China as an enemy." Julian J. Kuo said "Su Tseng-chang appears to have no desire to make a breakthrough in cross-Strait relations." These remarks had an edge to them. But given the two mens' status within the party, their remarks were not unjustified.

When Su Tseng-chang ran for party chairman. he declared that he would establish a China Affairs Committee and appoint Frank Hsieh chairman. Su Tseng-chang obviously hoped to kill two birds with one stone. One. He hoped to exploit this platform to reform cross-Strait policy. Two. He hope to use this platform to co-opt Frank Hsieh and Tsai Ing-wen, consolidate his power within the party, and his status as the "capo di tutti capi."

Frank Hsieh's response was forthright. He deliberately visited Mainland China in October of last year, and participated in a "bartending convention." Hsieh referred to the committee as a "Cross-Strait Affairs Committee" rather than a "China Affairs Committee." The perception was that Hsieh was waiting to give Su Tseng-chang a boost. The perception was that when Frank Hsieh returned to Taiwan, he would be appointed committee chairman. But as Julian J. Kuo says, "Now the situation is quite different."

Su Tseng-chang reneged on his promise. He reneged on his promise to appoint Frank Hsieh Chairman of the China Affairs Committee, Instead, on November 21 of last year, he appointed himself convener of the committee. He demoted the committee from a decision-making body to a discussion group. Frank Hsieh and Yu Shyi-kun refused to participate. The committee was stillborn. Since then it has been silent for nearly 130 days.

Does this mean Su Tseng-chang's "China Affairs Committee" is already stillborn? It was the only concrete cross-Strait policy commitment made by party chairman Su Tseng-chang. If he has reneged on this, is there any need to mention the others?

Albert Wu said that Su Tseng-chang is "hostile toward Mainland China." But we think a more realistic description would be that Su Tseng-chang has been unable to decide whether to remain "an enemy of [Mainland] China" or to "seek reconciliation with [Mainland] China." We do not believe Su Tseng-chang has the wherewithal to formulate a policy of "enmity with [Mainland] China." The real problem is that he lacks a policy of "reconciliation with [Mainland] China."

Today's domestic political situation, offers the DPP an excellent opportunity to shine. Consider the 4NPP controversy, or the pension funds controversy. Add to it the Lin Yi-shi corruption scandal and the Lai Shu-ju corruption scandal. But party chairman Su Tseng-chang's poll numbers do not shine. He is not even popular within his own party. People do not feel he "represents the future of Taiwan and the future of the DPP." He lacks a cross-Strait policy that offers hope for the DPP, let alone for Taiwan. That is his most serious shortcoming.

The 4NPP controversy and the pension funds controversy mean the Democratic Progressive Party could regain power in 2016. But party chairman Su Tseng-chang could be an obstacle to DPP cross-Strait policy reform. DPP insiders could decide that Su Tseng-chang cannot shed his image as "hostile toward Mainland China." If so, the DPP could look to someone else.

Su Tseng-chang may be thinking that he will overcome the hurdle of 2014 first, then change his cross-Strait policy in 2016. But Su Tseng-chang's hesitation has led to delays. Frank Hsieh was not appointed committee chairman. Will Tsai Ing-wen and her supporters make Frank Hsieh DPP chairman this time next year?

謝長廷會否繼蘇貞昌出任黨主席
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.04.01 03:33 am

民進黨人吳子嘉說，蘇貞昌若繼續緊抱「反中」路線，預料明年此刻他的黨主席連任之戰將面臨嚴峻考驗；取而代之的則是持續「向前行」的謝長廷。

這個消息，無論是確有其事或只是放話而已，皆顯示暗潮洶湧。民進黨主席一任兩年，去年當選的蘇貞昌任期將在明年五月屆滿。去年黨主席選舉時，因考慮二○一四年底有「七合一」選舉，曾有人提議新任黨主席的任期是否延至「七合一」選後，但未議決。倘若目前的情勢延續下去，明年此時即如吳子嘉所說是黨主席改選之時。

吳子嘉在日前赴平潭參加「兩岸關係研討會」前夕說：在歷史洪流推演下，當蘇貞昌選擇「敵對中國大陸」，而民進黨有必要打破國民黨對兩岸情勢的壟斷時，謝長廷參選下屆民進黨主席，「似乎已成必然趨勢」。

另一位也參加了平潭會議的民進黨前立委郭正亮說：民進黨能否在兩岸關係上有所突破，黨主席蘇貞昌似無意願，「若當時中國事務委員會由謝長廷出任，現在的局面可能是另一番景象」。

郭正亮與吳子嘉皆是目前民進黨內的話語人物，他們未必能反映民進黨的權力結構，卻能顯示中生代及改革派的思路。吳子嘉說，「蘇貞昌與中國為敵」，郭正亮說「蘇貞昌在突破兩岸關係上似無意願」，這些都是十分重鹹的評語；然以兩人在黨內的資歷，這樣的評語卻皆不是無憑無據。

蘇貞昌在競選黨主席時，宣示將成立中國事務委員會，並延請謝長廷出任主任委員。當時蘇貞昌想的顯是一石二鳥：一、利用這個平台，作兩岸政策轉型；二、利用這個平台，納入謝長廷，引進蔡英文，進行黨內的權力整合，以建立蘇貞昌的「共主」地位。

對此，謝長廷積極回應，還刻意在「出任中國（謝主張稱「兩岸」）事務委員會主任委員之前」，於去年十月赴大陸進行了一場「調酒之旅」；當時予人的感覺是，彷彿只待蘇貞昌順水推舟，在謝長廷返台後宣布任命，民進黨或許即可如郭正亮所說「現在的局面就可能是另一番景象」。

但是，蘇貞昌卻食言了。他未踐諾任命謝長廷出任中國事務委員會主任委員，卻在去年十一月二十一日自任為委員會的召集人，並將委員會的決策地位降為類如談話會；接著，謝長廷、游錫?拒絕參加，委員會未上路即告熄火，至今已經無聲無息近一百三十天。

這是否宣告：蘇貞昌的「中國事務委員會」已經胎死腹中？然而，這卻儼然是蘇貞昌出任黨主席時在兩岸政策所作的唯一具體承諾。倘若這唯一承諾也跳票，遑論其他？

吳子嘉說，蘇貞昌「敵對中國大陸」；但我們認為，更真實的描述應是，蘇貞昌在「與中國為敵」及「與中國和解」上，兩方面皆是一籌莫展。我們根本不相信蘇貞昌能拿得出一套「與中國為敵」的政策，但更大的問題卻是他又拿不出一套「與中國和解」的方案。

現今的國內政局，核四案或年金案，再加上林益世案與賴素如案，皆是民進黨的極佳表演舞台，但作黨主席的蘇貞昌不但在全國民調上沒有亮眼的數字，甚至在黨內也沒有人緣，缺少人氣。主要的原因是他沒有給人一種「可以代表台灣未來及可以代表民進黨未來」的感覺，而他的最大缺陷，當然就是在兩岸政策上不能帶民進黨走出去，更不可能帶台灣走出去。

由於核四、年金等爭議，民進黨內已有一種「二○一六第三次政黨輪替」的想像，但倘若黨主席蘇貞昌成了民進黨兩岸政策轉型的實際障礙，或是民進黨內漸漸覺得蘇貞昌已經無法擺脫其「敵對中國大陸」的形象；那麼，也許民進黨內「另請高明」的想法，就會成了「必然趨勢」。

蘇貞昌心裡的盤算或許是，先過了二○一四這一關再說，到了二○一六再來調整兩岸論述；但就因蘇貞昌的這一遲疑耽誤，未得到中國事務委員會主任委員職銜的謝長廷，會不會明年此時在蔡英文等的簇擁下就成了民進黨主席？