Big Roof Concept of China: DPP Should Leapfrog KMT

Big Roof Concept of China: DPP Should Leapfrog KMT
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 3, 2013

Summary: Frank Hsieh is akin to a dentist pulling a tooth. Taiwan independence is a decayed tooth that he has loosened with pliers. The decayed tooth no longer functions. But it continues to take up space on the gums. Sooner or later however, it is bound to loosen and fall away.

Full Text below:

Frank Hsieh is akin to a dentist pulling a tooth. Taiwan independence is a decayed tooth that he has loosened with pliers. The decayed tooth no longer functions. But it continues to take up space on the gums. Sooner or later however, it is bound to loosen and fall away.

Last October Frank Hsieh completed his "Journey of Exploration." He met with then State Council Taiwan Affairs Office Director Wang Yi. He also met with current director Zhang Zhijun, who was in Shenzhen to attend talks in Hong Kong. DPP insiders have been highly critical of Hsieh. But party disciplinary measures can clearly no longer prevent him from making ever bolder moves. Years ago Hsu Hsing-liang was expelled from the DPP for suggesting that the party "boldy go west." Frank Hsieh is unlikely to emulate Hsu. But he apparently hopes to be the DPP counterpart to Lien Chan.

On international, cross-Strait, and internal Taiwan matters, the trend within the DPP is to echo Su Tseng-chang. Su declared that the DPP "must not turn back the clock (in order to promote Taiwan independence)." Debate over Taiwan independence is increasingly a part of internecine struggles within the DPP. It has already become a phony issue.

The real tooth extraction is being performed by the Beijing authorities. Frank Hsieh is merely a pair of pliers in Beijing's hands. As long as Frank Hsieh can continue to cast Mainland policy as party reform, the DPP cannot expel him. The decayed tooth that is Taiwan independence will inevitably loosen and fall away. The decayed tooth of Taiwan independence must fall away. Only then can the DPP replace it with a new implant. If the decayed tooth that is Taiwan independence remains in place, and does not vacate its position, the opportunity to install new implants will be lost. The result will be the DPP's worst nightmare.

Taiwan independence has become a bone of contention within the DPP, in two ways. One. It is a bone of contention between reformers and Taiwan independence fundamentalists. Two. It is a bone of contention between Su and Tsai in the upcoming 2016 presidential election. Fundamentalists such as Yao Wen-chia argue that the issue of Taiwan independence has no bearing on the big picture, internally or externally. They argue that the rivalry between presidential candidates Tsai and Su is what is hindering DPP cross-Strait policy reform. They argue that the result is sure to be a lose-lose scenario, both for Su and for Tsai. If policy reform fails, the DPP cannot win in 2016. Even if it is fortunate enough to win, it will not be able to govern the nation based on current policy. This is a consensus shared by all factions within the DPP. This is why Frank Hsieh's rhetoric has become increasingly heated. So far no one has been able to shut him up or expel him from the party.

Frank Hsieh has defended the Republic of China Constitution in public. He has also reiterated his advocacy of a "constitutional one China" in closed-door talks with Zhang Zhijun. This must be considered a major milestone in DPP cross-Strait policy reform. So far Frank Hsieh's "constitutional one China" has no firm definition. Frank Hsieh has repeatedly amended it on a piecemeal basis. His current interpretation appears to be "overlapping sovereignty" and "both sides have a right to govern that is not subordinated to the other." This probably amounts to a return to the "one China constitution." It is no different that the Ma administration's "one China, different interpretations" position.

Frank Hsieh has a dilemma. Whether he admits it or not, his "constitutional one China" inevitably leads to "one China, different interpretations." This being the case, he is sure to encounter opposition from Taiwan independence advocates. Accusations that he is "plagiarizing the KMT" will make it difficult for him to win over swing voters. Given his predicament, Frank Hsieh should take full advantage of his freedom of action. He should use the "constitutional one China" argument to raise cross-Strait relations to the next level, to the "big roof concept of China" advocated by this newspaper. Such a rationale would transcend the "one China, different interpretations" rationale. It would amount to an upgraded version of "one China, different interpretations." It would leapfrog the KMT. It would elevate understanding of the cross-Strait relationship to a newer and higher level.

In fact, "constitutional one China" and the "big roof concept of China" are the same proposition on different levels. Frank Hsieh's plight will be the same whether he champions a "constitutional one China" or a "big roof concept of China." He will be attacked by his comrades just as vehemently. But if he elevates the cross-Strait framework to the level of a "big roof concept of China," he will not be "plagiarizing the KMT." He will leapfrog the KMT. He could redraw the map for Blue vs. Green political struggle.

The "big roof concept of China" is something the Ma administration does not dare touch. It is also something Beijing is reluctant to raise. Frank Hsieh enjoys greater freedom of action. But is is something that Hsieh, as an incoming leader, can make his platform. As long as Frank Hsieh does not depart from the "one China framework" or "constitutional one China," his argument will be considered "sensible and logical." In fact, he can dismiss Taiwan independence advocates within the party as diehards. As long as people in positions of influence on both sides consider Hsieh's argument "sensible and logical," he may be able to set the agenda for cross-strait relations.

The "constitutional one China" argument and the "one China framework" require linkage points. The "big roof concept of China" is precisely what Frank Hsieh should use to upgrade the existing framework; This being the case, DPP cross-strait policy reform may be able to leapfrog the KMT. It may be able to transcend the Blue camp. It may be able to persuade "non-Taiwan independence" forces on both sides of the Strait to think anew.

Frank Hsieh should use the "big roof concept of China" to replace the decayed tooth that is Taiwan independence, accelerating its loosening and falling away.

大屋頂中國：民進黨可以走在國民黨的前面
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.07.03 02:04 am

謝長廷像是一名正在拔牙的牙醫，台獨這個蛀牙已經被他的鐵鉗搖得鬆動起來；現在，這顆蛀牙已然失去了功能，只是仍然佔著牙床的一隅，但已可預見它遲早必將脫落。

謝長廷繼在去年十月的「開展之旅」中會見當時的國台辦主任王毅後，又借香港座談赴深圳會見現任的張志軍。民進黨內雖然對他頗有批評的聲音，卻顯然已無可能將謝長廷步步升高與拉大的動作當作黨紀事件來處理。謝長廷不太可能如當年主張「大膽西進」而遭民進黨逐出的許信良，他儼然希望將自己塑造成民進黨的連戰。

就國際、兩岸及台灣內部的大勢來看，台獨皆已是「不能再走的回頭路」（蘇貞昌語）；因此，台獨議題在台灣也愈來愈成為民進黨內部鬥爭的「溢出效應」，已是一個假議題。

其實，真正在拔牙的是北京當局，謝長廷則是北京手中的那一把鉗子。只要謝長廷能維持他的轉型議題不致熄火，而民進黨也無法逐出謝長廷，那顆台獨牙就必將愈來愈鬆動。接下來，如果那顆台獨牙脫落了，民進黨尚有重植新牙的機會；但如果那顆台獨牙只是愈來愈搖得厲害，卻始終佔著牙床不肯脫落，那就連重植新牙的機會都會喪失，這才將是民進黨的惡夢。

台獨議題當下成為民進黨的內鬥題材，可分兩個層次：一、是基本教義派與轉型派的鬥爭；二、是二○一六總統大選，蘇、蔡二人的鬥爭。基本教義派如姚嘉文等的見解，其實對內外大局已無關痛癢，倒是蘇蔡二人的總統候選人之爭若阻礙了民進黨兩岸政策的轉型，則必將是蘇蔡兩敗俱傷的下場。而若因此轉型失敗，民進黨倘不是二○一六無法勝選，就是即使僥倖勝選亦沒有主政治國的憑藉。這應是民進黨內所有派系的共同見解，而謝長廷也正因如此才能愈搞愈火熱，黨內迄今無人能叫他閉嘴或逐他出黨。

謝長廷此行不但公開倡議中華民國憲法，且在與張志軍的閉門會談中再提「憲法一中」；這應是民進黨兩岸政策轉型的根本基準。謝長廷的「憲法一中」迄今尚無穩定的論述。試撿拾拼湊起謝長廷一再變動的說法，他目前的看法似乎可以說是「主權相互涵蓋／治權互不隸屬」；這應可視為回到「憲法一中」的基準，已與馬政府主張的「一中各表」沒有區隔。

謝長廷面臨的困境，正在於他的「憲法一中」必定會走上「一中各表」的結論，無論他承不承認。倘係如此，他一方面仍會遭遇獨派的反對，而這種「抄襲國民黨」的格局也不易贏得中間選民的讚賞。在這樣的困境中，其實謝長廷應當運用他目前較其他人更大的自由揮灑空間，根據「憲法一中」，將兩岸關係提升至本報所倡的「大屋頂中國」之高度；這樣的論述體系，就可超越「一中各表」（升級版的一中各表），亦即可以超越國民黨，將兩岸論述推向一個更高更大的新境界。

其實，「憲法一中」與「大屋頂中國」，是同一命題的兩個層次。以謝長廷的處境，他不論是主張「憲法一中」或「大屋頂中國」，在黨內遭遇的攻擊都是一樣的；但是，若能將兩岸論述提升至「大屋頂中國」的高度，這就不是抄襲國民黨，而是一舉超越了國民黨，將有重劃藍綠政治版圖的可能性。

「大屋頂中國」這一個主張，正是馬政府不敢輕易碰觸的命題，也是北京不願輕易開啟的空間，卻正是謝長廷這樣具有較大自由度的新入局者可以領導倡議的題材。謝長廷只要不脫離「一中框架」或「憲法一中」，且能說得「合情合理」，他其實可以將黨內獨派留做最後一個嘗試說服的對象，只要讓兩岸有心人都覺得「合情合理」，他即不無可能操持了兩岸「議題設定」的主導權。

「憲法一中」及「一中框架」均苦無「連結點」，而「大屋頂中國」正是謝長廷能對現行架構提出補正的元素；倘若如此，民進黨的兩岸政策轉型，或許就能找到一條超越國民黨──青出於藍勝於藍──的道路，引領兩岸所有「非台獨」的勢力進入新思維。

謝長廷若以「大屋頂中國」為取代的新牙，則台獨這顆蛀牙的動搖與脫落將更是順理成章。