Taiwan's Pride is Its Democracy, Not Its Fists
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 22, 2008
If within a democracy one holds divergent views, the normal response is petitions or protests. Assaulting someone for holding different beliefs is beyond the pale. Vice Chairman of ARATS Zhang Minqin recently arrived in Taiwan to attend an academic conference. He was repeatedly met with shrill protests along the way. He joked that the public on Taiwan was giving him an "especially warm welcome." Zhang demonstrated remarkable forbearance. Alas, local Democratic Progressive Party officials incited their supporters to subject him to relentless harassment. They went so far as to assault Zhang and stomp on the car he was traveling in, caving in the roof. Democratic Progressive Party leaders used shockingly caustic language, openly calling him "The Enemy." They even added that "Zhang was lucky to get off so lightly." Who knew Taiwan's democracy would come to this? Who knew that the Democratic Progressive Party, which was once the ruling party, would actually consider assault and battery righteous behavior?
Ever since the Democratic Progressive Party was founded, it has hated being referred to as "a party of violence." We do not believe that endlessly repeated "isolated incidents" of violence are the essence of the Democratic Progressive Party. But these incidents happen over and over again, and the leaders of the Democratic Progressive Party never intervene. Instead, they abet and even further incite them for selfish partisan interests. The October 25 protest march is right around the corner. How can leaders of any self-respecting political party tolerate such socially divisive demagoguery?
Ironically, Zhang was assaulted in front of the Confucian Temple in Tainan, the first Confucian Temple constructed in Taiwan. Is this what has become of Confucius' teachings? When the fighting broke out, a group of elementary school children were on a field visit. They were so terrified they hid. Has the Democratic Progressive Party given the slightest consideration to the example they are setting for our children? Democracy is about counting heads. It is not about using ones' fists. The Democratic Progressive Party ruled for eight years. Has it still not learned the meaning of democracy? Taiwan faces a vast Chinese mainland. Its advantage has never been bigger fists. Taiwan's advantage has always been its democracy. Underneath democracy lies civilization. When has a prosperous and sophisticated Taiwan society ever resorted to fisticuffs to achieve victory?
The DPP vehemently objects to the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy. It can protest the Ma administration's policies in the Legislative Yuan, or even on the streets. But Zhang Minqin came to Taiwan to attend an academic conference. It is absurd to use him as a punching bag. What else has the violence achieved, other than underscore the Democratic Progressive Party's barbarism? Does mindlessly trampling the image of Taiwan's democracy beneath one's boots count as "loving Taiwan?"
Democratic Progressive Party officials refuse to reign in their more fanatical grass roots supporters. They have the temerity to refer to a visiting guest as "The Enemy," and to assert that Zhang was "lucky to get off so lightly." The public on Taiwan may have differing views on whether the mainland is "The Enemy." But even two countries at war have rules about how envoys are treated. Besides, cross-strait reconciliation has been the norm for years. The two sides' competition for international recognition, can surely be conducted in a civilized manner. Even the ruling Democratic Progressive Party's scorched earth diplomacy only resorted to money, not artillery. Besides, the ice in the Taiwan Strait has been melting for some time now. After May 20, DPP Yunlin County Magistrate Su Chi-fen even visited the mainland to promote the sale of Taiwan fruit. Mainland authorities may not have rolled out the red carpet for Su, but at least he was received with civility and politeness. No one assaulted him or threatened him.
Is the Ma administration's cross-Strait policy is moving too quickly or too slowly? The political class, the business community, and the grass roots may hold different views. But cross-strait exchanges have become an irreversible trend. Just before Formosa Plastics Group founder Wang Yung-ching died, he said his greatest regret was that cross-strait policy change was painfully slow. It was falling far behind the business community's requirements for sustained global competitiveness. If not for former President Lee Teng-hui's "Patience, No Haste" policy, Taiwan's industrial development would likely have reached a new milestone. Cross-Strait exchanges during the latter part of the Lee Teng-hui administration and the eight years Chen Shui-bian was in power, endured over a decade of stagnation. During this decade or so, non-governmental cross-Strait exchanges continually progressed. Since taking office, the Ma administration has eased restrictions on cross-Straits exchanges. If the Ma administration fails to take action, the private sector is not about to sit on its hands. The Ma administration has yet to fully implement its policies. Does the Democratic Progressive Party really want the people on the two sides to perceive each other as enemies? Particularly when the community is looking to mainland tourists to boost Taiwan's economy? The Democratic Progressive Party supporters' have a peculiar concept of hospitality. It is to frighten away tourists, and thereby chase away Taiwan's economic recovery.
Has the Democratic Progressive Party learned nothing from its eight years in office? Rampant corruption and endless demagoguery is precisely why the public on Taiwan has rejected the Democratic Progressive Party. Over the past eight years, A Bian's demagoguery has increased communal strife to potentially irreversible levels. The Chen Shui-bian regime has stepped down. But the Chen Shui-bian family continues to elude justice. It is expanding its mobilization of Deep Green forces, and intensifying social polarization. It is openly betraying expectations the public once had for a local political party. The Democratic Progressive Party has fallen into a vicious cycle, becoming a "party of violence."
Over eight years ago, the Democratic Progressive Party won the presidential election. It did not rely on its fists, but on its ideals. Today, the Democratic Progressive Party has lost power. But has it lost all its ideals as well? Demoralized individuals must pull themselves together. If the Democratic Progressive Party wants to stand straight once more, it must remember that Taiwan is a civilized society. Assaulting someone will not prove you are right. Hatred must not be permitted to spread. Come back to those who placed their faith in you. Transform the Democratic Progressive Party into a party of reason.
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.10.22
台灣自豪的是民主風度 不是拳頭
中時社論
有 不同意見，陳情、請願、抗議都是民主常態，但是，因為有不同意見而出手打人，是絕對無法容忍的事。大陸海協會副會長張銘清來台參與學術會議，一路行來屢遭 嗆聲，他自我解嘲是台灣民眾給他「特別熱情的歡迎」，遭嗆者都能以如此心情面對台灣民眾的不滿情緒，很遺憾的，民進黨地方民代竟煽動支持者如影隨形地抗 議，甚至囂張到動手打人，躍上公務車踐踏洩憤；民進黨中央公職更以尖刻的言詞指來者是「敵」，如此行為已經算是客氣的了。沒想到，台灣民主走到今天，執政 過的民進黨人，還能如此理直氣壯地自認打人有理。
民進黨從創黨伊始，最痛恨被批評是「暴力黨」，我們也不相信一而再、再而三發生的「個別 事件」就是民進黨的本質，然而，這些反覆發生的事端，從不見民進黨領導階層有效約束，甚至縱容公職激化民眾情緒，以攫取一己一黨之政治利益，尤其一○二五 遊行在即，作為政黨的領導者，豈容社會仇恨情緒因為這些無恥政客的政治動機，一再渲染、擴散？
說來諷刺，張銘清遭毆的地點是在全台首學的 府城台南孔廟前，孔子教化為何物？打架紛亂的同時，正有一隊小學生魚貫進入參觀，嚇得孩子們左閃右躲，民進黨人想過沒有，這是什麼扭曲的教育示範？民主講 究的是數人頭，不是出拳頭，執政八年了的民進黨，難道還學不會民主的真義嗎？台灣面對偌大一個中國大陸，優勢從來不是拳頭比別人大，相反的，台灣的優勢就 是「民主」二字，民主的深層意涵是「文明」二字，什麼時候富而好禮的台灣社會，會以出拳打人取勝？
民進黨對馬政府的兩岸政策有強烈反彈，大可在立法院、甚至街頭遊行，衝著馬政府嗆聲，拿來台參加學術會議的張銘清當沙包，不是莫名其妙嗎？除了彰顯民進黨人的粗魯，還能達到任何目的嗎？把台灣民主、台灣形象踩在腳底下的無禮無文行徑，能叫愛台灣嗎？
民 進黨中央公職面對基層激昂失控的行為，無力阻止，竟還認為對方是「敵」，打人的行為「算是客氣」的了。大陸是不是「敵」，或許台灣社會中還有若干不同見 解，但是，不要忘了，兩國交戰還有不斬來使的規矩，遑論海峽兩岸已經和解多年，兩岸在國際外交場域的競爭，用的也是文明人的方法，即使民進黨執政，搞出烽 火外交，用的也是鈔票而非大炮。更不要忘了，兩岸的冰融氣氛已成，五二○之後，民進黨籍的雲林縣長蘇治芬還登陸推銷台灣水果，不要說對方待蘇縣長為上賓， 至少客客氣氣，沒拿出拳頭唬人。
馬政府的兩岸政策是快是慢，政商界和基層社會，或有不同見解，但是兩岸交流早已成為不可逆轉的潮流，甫辭 世的台塑集團創辦人王永慶過世前，最遺憾的就是兩岸交流速度，遠遠在企業競逐世界競爭力之後。若非前總統李登輝的戒急用忍，台灣產業發展或已進入新的里程 碑，兩岸交流從李登輝執政後期到陳水扁執政八年，足足停滯了十數年之久，這十多年來，兩岸民間互通的腳步卻從來沒停過，馬政府就任以來，做的是政策鬆綁， 即使馬政府不做，民間也不會拖延等待，只是讓政府管理機制更難上正軌，難不成，民進黨人真要兩岸人民互為敵人嗎？尤其是，當社會普遍期待開放大陸觀光客能 更有效提振台灣經濟之際，民進黨激進支持者的待客之道，不是嚇跑台灣觀光的客人，而是嚇跑台灣經濟復甦的可能契機。
已有執政八年經驗的民 進黨到底深刻檢討過沒有？貪汙和無止盡的族群動員，正是台灣社會最厭惡而唾棄民進黨的主因，過去八年，因為扁政府的操作，讓社會仇恨升高到難以彌平；扁政 府下台了，卻還讓陳水扁為了扁家弊案解套，擴大深綠動員，激化對立情緒，硬生生摧毀一個曾經深受民眾期待的本土政黨的本質，民進黨卻還無知無覺地陷入打架 政黨的惡性循環。
八年多前，民進黨贏得總統大選，靠得並不是拳頭，而是理念；民進黨如今失去政權，難道連理念都喪失了嗎？失志者必須奮勵 圖強，如果民進黨還想重新站起來再出發，請記得：台灣，已經是一個文明社會，拳頭打不出道理，仇恨情緒不可放任蔓延，請回到那個曾經被人們深切期待、講理 的民進黨。
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
President Ma Should Still Attempt to Attend APEC
President Ma Should Still Attempt to Attend APEC
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 21, 2008
Summary: This year's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting will be held in late November, in Lima, Peru. Several candidates are rumored to be President Ma Ying-jeou's choice of representative to the unofficial meeting of national leaders. But before he picks someone to represent him, President Ma should attempt to attend in person. Beijing has long hoped that Chen Yunlin, President of the Association for Relations Across the Straits, could come to Taiwan. Therefore it is makes sense for the leaders of the two sides to meet during the unofficial APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting. Such a meeting would contribute to cross-strait interactions, and deserves the Mainland authorities' careful consideration. The most important prerequisite to the development of cross-strait relations is learning to respect each other.
Full Text below:
This year's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting will be held in late November, in Lima, Peru. Several candidates are rumored to be President Ma Ying-jeou's choice of representative to the unofficial meeting of national leaders. But before he picks someone to represent him, President Ma should attempt to attend in person.
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation organization was established in 1991. In the organization's memorandum of understanding, agreed to by all the parties, the Mainland authorities stipulated that Taiwan authorities may send only ministerial-level or lower officials from the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs may not attend. During the 1993 APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, the Mainland authorities asked that the restrictions in the Memorandum of Understanding be extended. Taiwan would not be allowed to send officials any higher than the Ministry of Economic Affairs to the meeting.
APEC is a quasi-government organization. In order to reduce political sensitivities and allow the two sides to participate, Member States are referred to as "economies." The Economic Leaders' Meeting is known as the "Informal Economic Leaders' Meeting." But over the years, the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting has become an important diplomatic venue for the heads of Asia-Pacific states and the United States. In fact, as Member States, the Taiwan authorities and the Mainland authorities are completely equal. Leaders of Member States are allowed to attend the summit in high style. Only the Republic of China's leaders are asked to specially designate a representative every year.
Only the President of the Republic of China may not attend. Even the president's special envoy must be kept to the level of Ministers of Economic Affairs and Ministers of Trade, or below. Officials on Taiwan have long been attempting to breakthrough to a higher level. They have been fighting unsuccessfully to allow the Vice Premier, the former Vice President, and the Chairman of the Legislature to attend. In attempts to break through the vague restrictions on political status, they have sent figures with obvious political colors, such as Senior Presidential Adviser Koo Chen-fu and Academia Sinica President Lee Yuan-tse. But such gestures are meaningful only on Taiwan. They have no impact whatsover on APEC's established practices.
Koo Chen-fu has passed away. Lee Yuan-tse is unwilling to participate. In recent years several corporate heads such as Lin Hsin-yi, Morris Chang, Stan Shih have served as the president's Special Envoys. Over the past decades, leaders on Taiwan have gotten no closer to the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting.
Since Ma Ying-jeou became president, cross-strait relations have eased. Ma's "Diplomatic Truce" has become his main policy. Rumor has it former Vice President and Honorary KMT Chairman Lien Chan may attend the APEC Leaders's Meeting on behalf of Ma Ying-jeou. Lien Chan has visited the mainland and established communications channels between the Kuomintang and the CCP. But his identity as a former Vice-President still poses a direct challenge to the framework the Mainland authorities have established for Taiwan. If the past is any indicator, the Mainland authorities will not allow Lien Chan to attend. In the end, the public on Taiwan will decide for itself how much "good will" the Mainland authorities are offering.
In the process of upholding our rights, interests, and equality, President Ma must not relinquish his struggle to attend in person. Even though attending is impossible, our president must make every effort to do so. According to precedent, APEC and the host nation will send a formal invitation to heads of state, They will send a special envoy to formally invite the President of the Republic of China to send a representative. They will even hold a number of back and forth discussions. They will show at least ritual respect. They will acknowledge that the President of the Republic of China has the right to full and equal representation, and that only realpolitik necessitates demeaning the Republic of China.
Even though it has yet to become a reality, APEC precedent has in fact repeatedly confirmed that the President of the Republic of China is eligible to attend the Economic Leaders' Meeting. Ma Ying-jeou has always aggressively sought to attend. Attempting to do so will help uphold the President of the Republic of China's right to attend. We must fight for our rights. If we fail to make an effort because we are overly concerned about cross-strait sensitivities, adverse consequences will follow. A future breakthrough will be more difficult. If the Mainland authorities acquire increased power to determine the Republic of China's international status, and if this authority appears to meet with Taiwan's approval, we must be aware of the political consequences.
Since taking office, President Ma has expressed goodwill toward the Mainland authorities. Beijing has also refrained from luring away Paraguay. But on the international stage the real returns have been slight, particularly with regards international organizations. Former American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Douglas Paal recently proposed that President Ma "find a title under which he may personally participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Economic Leaders Meeting. Over the next two or three years it is very likely to become a reality." This means that during the new era of cross-strait relations, Republic of China officials may make a breakthrough regarding participation in APEC activities. But it will not come without effort. President Ma may have a better chance than in the past.
Beijing has long hoped that Chen Yunlin, President of the Association for Relations Across the Straits, could come to Taiwan. Therefore it makes sense for the leaders of the two sides to meet during the unofficial APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting. Such a meeting would contribute to cross-strait interaction, and deserves the Mainland authorities' careful consideration. The most important prerequisite to the development of cross-strait relations is learning to respect each other.
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.10.21
馬總統還是該爭取出席ＡＰＥＣ
中時社論
今年的亞太經合會議（ＡＰＥＣ）將於十一月下旬在秘魯首都利馬舉行，目前有關代表馬英九總統出席非正式領袖會議的人選有不同傳聞，但在派出代打以前，馬總統還是應該盡量爭取親自出席的機會。
亞太經合會議在一九九一年成立時，中共即在與ＡＰＥＣ的諒解備忘錄中約定，台灣只能派經濟事務部長級官員與會，且外交部長及次長亦不能出席。一九九三年開 始舉行領袖高峰會之後，中共進一步要求延伸諒解備忘錄中的限制，不允許台灣出席領袖會議的人士超過經濟事務部長級的層級。
ＡＰＥＣ是一個半官方國際組織，為了降低政治敏感性，讓兩岸均能參與，成員國均以「經濟體」為單位，領袖峰會也稱為「經濟體非正式領袖會議」。不過多年下 來，ＡＰＥＣ領袖會議已經成了亞太國家與美國一個重要的元首外交場域。作為一個會員國，台灣的地位其實與中共是完全平等的。既然如此，當所有會員國領袖都 可以風風光光出席高峰會，唯獨台灣的領導人每年都被主辦單位要求另行指定代表出席。
不只台灣總統不能與會，連代表總統出席的特使人選也始終被壓低在經貿部長層級。台灣一直想突破限制拉高層級，先後曾爭取由行政院副院長、前副總統和立法院 長出席，但一直無法成功，因此轉而以具政治象徵色彩的總統府資政辜振甫與中研院院長李遠哲出馬，試圖以其政治地位隱約突破官階限制，不過這種細微差異只對 台灣內部有意義，對ＡＰＥＣ已經確立的慣例並無影響。
由於辜老仙逝、李遠哲不願再出馬，最近幾年改由企業大老如林信義、張忠謀、施振榮擔任總統特使。綜觀十數年來，台灣領袖與ＡＰＥＣ高峰會的距離，其實並沒有縮短多少。
馬英九就任總統以來，兩岸關係趨於緩和，「外交休兵」也成為政策主軸。近來有傳聞指前副總統、國民黨榮譽主席連戰可能代表馬英九出席ＡＰＥＣ領袖會議，儘 管連戰曾訪問大陸並建立國共溝通平台，但其曾任副總統的身分，仍然對中共在ＡＰＥＣ為台灣設下的框架形成直接挑戰。如果按照過去的慣例，中共大概不會同意 由連戰出席。而事情最後的發展，將是台灣民眾驗證中共對台「善意」的依據。
不過，在程序上、在堅持平等參與權益上，馬總統不能直接就放棄要求親自出席。這些年，就算明知無緣參與，我們的總統總還是盡一切努力爭取，而ＡＰＥＣ與主 辦國慣例上也會送來正式的元首邀請函，並派遣特使央請台灣總統另派代表，甚至還需要來回多次磋商。亦即禮數上做到尊重，且承認台灣元首有充分且平等權利參 與，只因政治現實而必須委屈台灣。
因此，即使到現在尚未成為事實，但在ＡＰＥＣ的運作上，其實已經在慣例中一再確認了台灣元首有出席領袖峰會的資格。馬英九秉持往例積極爭取出席，將是繼續 維持台灣元首出席權的一項重要政治動作。該爭的權利，我們一定要爭；如果因為過分顧忌兩岸氣氛而主動放棄努力，有可造成後續不利影響，讓未來更難獲致突 破。如果讓中共對台灣的國際地位取得更強、且被視為經台灣同意的決定權，其政治效應令人擔憂，台灣不可不慎。
馬總統就任以來對中共不斷拋出善意，但北京除了沒挖走巴拉圭之外，在國際舞台上的實質回報其實很少，尤其是在國際組織部分。前美國在台協會台北辦事處處長 包道格最近建議馬總統，「找個頭銜，親自參與亞太經合會領袖會議，未來兩三年極可能成為事實。」說明在新階段的兩岸關係中，台灣參與ＡＰＥＣ的模式有可能 找到突破點，但是它不會平白降臨，還是需要努力去尋求。但相較之下，也許馬總統會有比過去多一點點的機會。
其實，當北京一直希望促成海協會會長陳雲林來台時，兩岸領導人在ＡＰＥＣ的非正式領袖會議上碰面，應該是個很自然、也有助於兩岸互動的機會，值得北京當局慎重考量。兩岸關係要良性發展，學會彼此尊重，應該是首要前提。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 21, 2008
Summary: This year's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting will be held in late November, in Lima, Peru. Several candidates are rumored to be President Ma Ying-jeou's choice of representative to the unofficial meeting of national leaders. But before he picks someone to represent him, President Ma should attempt to attend in person. Beijing has long hoped that Chen Yunlin, President of the Association for Relations Across the Straits, could come to Taiwan. Therefore it is makes sense for the leaders of the two sides to meet during the unofficial APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting. Such a meeting would contribute to cross-strait interactions, and deserves the Mainland authorities' careful consideration. The most important prerequisite to the development of cross-strait relations is learning to respect each other.
Full Text below:
This year's Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting will be held in late November, in Lima, Peru. Several candidates are rumored to be President Ma Ying-jeou's choice of representative to the unofficial meeting of national leaders. But before he picks someone to represent him, President Ma should attempt to attend in person.
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation organization was established in 1991. In the organization's memorandum of understanding, agreed to by all the parties, the Mainland authorities stipulated that Taiwan authorities may send only ministerial-level or lower officials from the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs may not attend. During the 1993 APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, the Mainland authorities asked that the restrictions in the Memorandum of Understanding be extended. Taiwan would not be allowed to send officials any higher than the Ministry of Economic Affairs to the meeting.
APEC is a quasi-government organization. In order to reduce political sensitivities and allow the two sides to participate, Member States are referred to as "economies." The Economic Leaders' Meeting is known as the "Informal Economic Leaders' Meeting." But over the years, the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting has become an important diplomatic venue for the heads of Asia-Pacific states and the United States. In fact, as Member States, the Taiwan authorities and the Mainland authorities are completely equal. Leaders of Member States are allowed to attend the summit in high style. Only the Republic of China's leaders are asked to specially designate a representative every year.
Only the President of the Republic of China may not attend. Even the president's special envoy must be kept to the level of Ministers of Economic Affairs and Ministers of Trade, or below. Officials on Taiwan have long been attempting to breakthrough to a higher level. They have been fighting unsuccessfully to allow the Vice Premier, the former Vice President, and the Chairman of the Legislature to attend. In attempts to break through the vague restrictions on political status, they have sent figures with obvious political colors, such as Senior Presidential Adviser Koo Chen-fu and Academia Sinica President Lee Yuan-tse. But such gestures are meaningful only on Taiwan. They have no impact whatsover on APEC's established practices.
Koo Chen-fu has passed away. Lee Yuan-tse is unwilling to participate. In recent years several corporate heads such as Lin Hsin-yi, Morris Chang, Stan Shih have served as the president's Special Envoys. Over the past decades, leaders on Taiwan have gotten no closer to the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting.
Since Ma Ying-jeou became president, cross-strait relations have eased. Ma's "Diplomatic Truce" has become his main policy. Rumor has it former Vice President and Honorary KMT Chairman Lien Chan may attend the APEC Leaders's Meeting on behalf of Ma Ying-jeou. Lien Chan has visited the mainland and established communications channels between the Kuomintang and the CCP. But his identity as a former Vice-President still poses a direct challenge to the framework the Mainland authorities have established for Taiwan. If the past is any indicator, the Mainland authorities will not allow Lien Chan to attend. In the end, the public on Taiwan will decide for itself how much "good will" the Mainland authorities are offering.
In the process of upholding our rights, interests, and equality, President Ma must not relinquish his struggle to attend in person. Even though attending is impossible, our president must make every effort to do so. According to precedent, APEC and the host nation will send a formal invitation to heads of state, They will send a special envoy to formally invite the President of the Republic of China to send a representative. They will even hold a number of back and forth discussions. They will show at least ritual respect. They will acknowledge that the President of the Republic of China has the right to full and equal representation, and that only realpolitik necessitates demeaning the Republic of China.
Even though it has yet to become a reality, APEC precedent has in fact repeatedly confirmed that the President of the Republic of China is eligible to attend the Economic Leaders' Meeting. Ma Ying-jeou has always aggressively sought to attend. Attempting to do so will help uphold the President of the Republic of China's right to attend. We must fight for our rights. If we fail to make an effort because we are overly concerned about cross-strait sensitivities, adverse consequences will follow. A future breakthrough will be more difficult. If the Mainland authorities acquire increased power to determine the Republic of China's international status, and if this authority appears to meet with Taiwan's approval, we must be aware of the political consequences.
Since taking office, President Ma has expressed goodwill toward the Mainland authorities. Beijing has also refrained from luring away Paraguay. But on the international stage the real returns have been slight, particularly with regards international organizations. Former American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Douglas Paal recently proposed that President Ma "find a title under which he may personally participate in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Economic Leaders Meeting. Over the next two or three years it is very likely to become a reality." This means that during the new era of cross-strait relations, Republic of China officials may make a breakthrough regarding participation in APEC activities. But it will not come without effort. President Ma may have a better chance than in the past.
Beijing has long hoped that Chen Yunlin, President of the Association for Relations Across the Straits, could come to Taiwan. Therefore it makes sense for the leaders of the two sides to meet during the unofficial APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting. Such a meeting would contribute to cross-strait interaction, and deserves the Mainland authorities' careful consideration. The most important prerequisite to the development of cross-strait relations is learning to respect each other.
中時電子報
中國時報 2008.10.21
馬總統還是該爭取出席ＡＰＥＣ
中時社論
今年的亞太經合會議（ＡＰＥＣ）將於十一月下旬在秘魯首都利馬舉行，目前有關代表馬英九總統出席非正式領袖會議的人選有不同傳聞，但在派出代打以前，馬總統還是應該盡量爭取親自出席的機會。
亞太經合會議在一九九一年成立時，中共即在與ＡＰＥＣ的諒解備忘錄中約定，台灣只能派經濟事務部長級官員與會，且外交部長及次長亦不能出席。一九九三年開 始舉行領袖高峰會之後，中共進一步要求延伸諒解備忘錄中的限制，不允許台灣出席領袖會議的人士超過經濟事務部長級的層級。
ＡＰＥＣ是一個半官方國際組織，為了降低政治敏感性，讓兩岸均能參與，成員國均以「經濟體」為單位，領袖峰會也稱為「經濟體非正式領袖會議」。不過多年下 來，ＡＰＥＣ領袖會議已經成了亞太國家與美國一個重要的元首外交場域。作為一個會員國，台灣的地位其實與中共是完全平等的。既然如此，當所有會員國領袖都 可以風風光光出席高峰會，唯獨台灣的領導人每年都被主辦單位要求另行指定代表出席。
不只台灣總統不能與會，連代表總統出席的特使人選也始終被壓低在經貿部長層級。台灣一直想突破限制拉高層級，先後曾爭取由行政院副院長、前副總統和立法院 長出席，但一直無法成功，因此轉而以具政治象徵色彩的總統府資政辜振甫與中研院院長李遠哲出馬，試圖以其政治地位隱約突破官階限制，不過這種細微差異只對 台灣內部有意義，對ＡＰＥＣ已經確立的慣例並無影響。
由於辜老仙逝、李遠哲不願再出馬，最近幾年改由企業大老如林信義、張忠謀、施振榮擔任總統特使。綜觀十數年來，台灣領袖與ＡＰＥＣ高峰會的距離，其實並沒有縮短多少。
馬英九就任總統以來，兩岸關係趨於緩和，「外交休兵」也成為政策主軸。近來有傳聞指前副總統、國民黨榮譽主席連戰可能代表馬英九出席ＡＰＥＣ領袖會議，儘 管連戰曾訪問大陸並建立國共溝通平台，但其曾任副總統的身分，仍然對中共在ＡＰＥＣ為台灣設下的框架形成直接挑戰。如果按照過去的慣例，中共大概不會同意 由連戰出席。而事情最後的發展，將是台灣民眾驗證中共對台「善意」的依據。
不過，在程序上、在堅持平等參與權益上，馬總統不能直接就放棄要求親自出席。這些年，就算明知無緣參與，我們的總統總還是盡一切努力爭取，而ＡＰＥＣ與主 辦國慣例上也會送來正式的元首邀請函，並派遣特使央請台灣總統另派代表，甚至還需要來回多次磋商。亦即禮數上做到尊重，且承認台灣元首有充分且平等權利參 與，只因政治現實而必須委屈台灣。
因此，即使到現在尚未成為事實，但在ＡＰＥＣ的運作上，其實已經在慣例中一再確認了台灣元首有出席領袖峰會的資格。馬英九秉持往例積極爭取出席，將是繼續 維持台灣元首出席權的一項重要政治動作。該爭的權利，我們一定要爭；如果因為過分顧忌兩岸氣氛而主動放棄努力，有可造成後續不利影響，讓未來更難獲致突 破。如果讓中共對台灣的國際地位取得更強、且被視為經台灣同意的決定權，其政治效應令人擔憂，台灣不可不慎。
馬總統就任以來對中共不斷拋出善意，但北京除了沒挖走巴拉圭之外，在國際舞台上的實質回報其實很少，尤其是在國際組織部分。前美國在台協會台北辦事處處長 包道格最近建議馬總統，「找個頭銜，親自參與亞太經合會領袖會議，未來兩三年極可能成為事實。」說明在新階段的兩岸關係中，台灣參與ＡＰＥＣ的模式有可能 找到突破點，但是它不會平白降臨，還是需要努力去尋求。但相較之下，也許馬總統會有比過去多一點點的機會。
其實，當北京一直希望促成海協會會長陳雲林來台時，兩岸領導人在ＡＰＥＣ的非正式領袖會議上碰面，應該是個很自然、也有助於兩岸互動的機會，值得北京當局慎重考量。兩岸關係要良性發展，學會彼此尊重，應該是首要前提。
Monday, October 20, 2008
For Those in Authority, Panic is an Unaffordable Luxury
For Those in Authority, Panic is an Unaffordable Luxury
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 20, 2008
Ma Ying-jeou has a frugal nature. When he invites foreign guests to lunch, they "brown bag" it. Ma Ying-jeou urges officials not to send flowers or gifts. When florists complain, putting him on the spot, he visits a shoe store and buys a new pair of shoes to stimulate the economy.
The Minister of Health set the legal limit for melamine at 2.5 ppm. But when the public complained, he lacked the courage to defend his policy, With a heavy heart, he stepped down. The current Minister of Health is unwilling to talk about legal limits. Instead he stages photo ops in which he eats bread to demonstrate its safety.
When the inheritance tax was reduced from 50 percent to 10 percent, it was branded a "tax cut for the rich." To mollify critics. the administration cut taxes across the board, benefiting the middle class as well. Now the criticism is "if everybody gets a tax cut, where's the government going get its money?"
This is the plight of the Ma administration. No matter what it does, it's wrong. The policy team finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. The more panicky it gets, the more mistakes it makes. The more mistakes it makes, the more it gets criticized. The more it gets criticized, the less confident it becomes. The less confident it becomes, the more panicky it gets.
During the five months Ma Ying-jeou has been in office, everything has gone wrong, mostly due to external factors. Natural disasters have struck one after another. Add to this global inflation and a once in a century global financial tidal wave, and countless nations find themselves in a state of crisis. Applying the same standards to all of them, then the hardship the public is experiencing cannot be blamed on Ma Ying-jeou. Nevertheless, the opposition DPP has chosen to oppose the ruling administration out of sheer orneriness. For example, the contaminated milk scandal was turned into an anti-Ma campaign. The DPP trotted out demagogic non sequiteurs such as "The lives of Taiwanese have less value than Chinese pigs." But when we learned that 2.5 ppm was the internationally recognized safety standard for melamine levels, the Democratic Progressive Party refused to utter a single "Sorry." Instead, Lin Fang-yu was forced to step down for no good reason. We live in an Age of Unreason.
That said, Ma Ying-jeou's elite team has not demonstrated a capacity to turn crises into opportunities. Instead it has revealed an embarrassing tendency to panic in the face of emergencies, and an extraordinary clumsiness in dealing with crises. It is always behind the curve. Its leadership style has failed to instill public confidence. Instead, it has lost the respect of the public. This group of officials, utterly lacking in self-confidence, has recently become even more panicky. When hard-nosed legislators asked whether officials who received poor approval ratings in the media should forgo their year-end bonuses, they merely hemmed and hawed. They looked like a bunch of Yes Men whose only question when asked to jump is "How high?" Is it really necessary for government officials to abase themselves like this?
The public often offers unsolicited advice to the Ma administration. It says the administration must improve communication with the public. But the administration remains trapped in the Myth of Public Opinion, constantly looking over its shoulder. Therefore we would like to offer the administration a few suggestions. One. Do not try to please everyone. Trying to please everyone and you will only wind up pleasing no one. The recent tax cuts are the best example, Cut this and you are criticized. Cut that and you are criticized. Cut this and that and you are criticized even more harshly. Meanwhile, governments the world over are somehow able to cut taxes.
Two. You must have the courage to do what's right. If it must be done, then do it. If you are in the right, then you must not waver. You must communicate with the public. In addition to acting in good faith, you must rule in accordance with the law. Authority must be supported by expertise. The contaminated milk scandal is a good example. After sacrificing Lin Fang-yu for no reason, the Ministry of Health still has not given us a clear account of events. Meanwhile, didn't Central Bank President Peng Huai-nang's proposal that foreign exchange reserves be used for a "sovereign fund" meet with public approval? Didn't the public praise his courage? This shows us the public is not entirely incapable of understanding reason.
Three. Because people are not entirely incapable of understanding reason, the right direction must be explained to them. One need not appease mobs. A Blue vs. Green standoff prevails on Taiwan. Every issue is polarized. If the administration wants to get things done, it must show determination. In the face of unwarranted verbal abuse such as "Taiwanese people are valued less than Chinese pigs," the administration's response must not be terrified silence. The Ministry of Education's response to demands that it restore the official name "Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall" must not be to pass the buck to a "citizens forum." Otherwise why turn decision-making power over to you in the first place?
Four. Communicating with the public does not mean interfering with the media. Some of the Ma administration's behavior toward the media has been questionable. If officials clearly misspoke, the administration may not demand a retraction. Recent the China Broadcasting Company and Central News Agency have been careful to avoid accusations of featherbedding and interference in the freedom of the press. Those in power should not expect to be media darlings. Those in power have no right to expect the media to be "friendly."
Times are hard on those in power. Ma, Liu and other ivory tower intellectuals rule the nation. Now they realize how hard the job can be on the minds and bodies, and how thick the Fog of War can become. External factors cannot be controlled. One's leadership style however, is one's own responsibility. The policy team must act courageously, communicate effectively, and rebuild its credibility.
化險為夷，主政者不可遇亂則亂
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.20 02:02 am
那一廂，是一個儉樸成性、請外賓吃便當、號召官員不收花不送禮的馬英九。這一廂，是一個受到花農抱怨之後，如今在鎂光燈直擊下，鞋店裡付錢買新鞋以刺激景氣的馬英九。
那一廂，是一個率先訂下三聚氰胺二點五ppm安全標準，但在眾怒之下不敢大聲為政策辯護，只好黯然下台的前任衛生署長。這一廂，是一個絕口不再說出檢測數字標準，努力在鏡頭前表演大口吃麵包的現任衛生署長。
那一廂，是一個將遺產稅率由百分之五十猛降為百分之十，卻被罵為「圖利富人」的賦稅新方案。這一廂，是一個為了安撫異議，只好一併調降綜所稅以嘉惠中產階級，結果又被質疑「大家都減稅，政府錢從哪裡來」的兩難局面。
這就是現在馬政府的困境，簡直是怎麼做怎麼錯。其結果，施政團隊陷入「慌了手腳→越做越錯→越錯越挨罵→越挨罵越沒信心→越沒信心就越慌了手腳」的惡性循環。
馬英九上任五個月，諸事不順，大部分出於外在環境因素。除了天災不斷，還加上國際性的通貨膨脹，以及「世紀僅見」的全球金融海嘯。多少國家都在危機總動 員，故若持平而觀，民眾度小月，不能全怪馬英九。同時，在野黨為反對而反對，例如藉毒奶事件擴大「反中打馬」戰線，亂罵「台灣人命不如中國豬」來煽風點 火，結果卻證明二點五ppm乃國際接受的安全標準，民進黨卻一點理虧的樣子也無，反倒是林芳郁冤枉下台徒留憾事。這的確是一個難以理喻的時代。
但話說回來，馬英九率領著精英團隊，並未發揮「化險為夷」的處理能力，反而顯現了「遇亂則亂」的窘態，格外拙於應付危機。該反應的時候慢半拍，該展示領袖 風範時卻沒能安定人心，終於失去了民眾的尊重。而一群毫無自信的官員更加亂了手腳，連立委強悍追問是否民調差就該取消年終獎金，都見人事行政首長唯唯諾 諾，一副即刻「遵命」的模樣。政府官員何以弱勢至此？
輿論常「指教」馬政府，要加強與民眾的溝通，卻見政府又常因此卡在民意的迷思上，凡事瞻前顧後。在此，我們給政府幾個具體建議：第一，不要想討好所有的 人，想要面面討好，結果一定面面不討好。最近減稅方案就是最好的例子，減這個也有人罵，減那個也有人罵，「統統有減」之後繼續被罵。但如今不是全球各國都 陸續推出減稅改革嗎？
所以，第二，對的事就勇敢去做，據理就要力爭，理直就要氣壯。與民眾「溝通」，除了誠意之外，也要用依法行政、公權力執行、專業權威作後盾。毒奶事件即是 一例，平白犧牲林芳郁之後，何以衛生署至今仍未敢把事件道理說個清楚？相對之下，央行總裁彭淮南於動用外匯存底作「主權基金」的建議不假辭色，不也眾聲叫 好，讚其擔當？可見民眾不會完全不明事理。
第三，正因為民眾不至於完全不明事理，所以更要向大眾解釋正確方向，不必屈從所有的民意。台灣存在藍綠對立的背景，凡事皆有分裂的意見。政府如果勇於任 事，就應擇善固執。如果面對「台灣人不如中國豬」的無理謾罵只能噤聲，教育部連個中正紀念堂復名議題都說要交由「公民論壇」決定，則決策權到底在誰手裡？
第四，話說回來，與民意溝通，不代表可插手媒體。馬政府與媒體互動，有些事做得不大漂亮。如果明明是政府官員說錯話，不能反過來硬要媒體更正；又像是最近 的央廣與中央社等話題，更該小心避免人事酬庸和「干涉新聞自由」的指責。執政者不可能再是媒體寵兒，也沒道理企求媒體「友善」。
沒錯，這是一個對執政者極不友善的年代，馬劉等人書生治國，現在才真正面臨「苦其心志，空乏其身，行拂亂其所為」的震撼挑戰。唯外在大環境難以掌控，內部領導風格更要靠自己建立，執政團隊要勉力走回「果敢任事，有效溝通，重建公信力」的良性循環。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 20, 2008
Ma Ying-jeou has a frugal nature. When he invites foreign guests to lunch, they "brown bag" it. Ma Ying-jeou urges officials not to send flowers or gifts. When florists complain, putting him on the spot, he visits a shoe store and buys a new pair of shoes to stimulate the economy.
The Minister of Health set the legal limit for melamine at 2.5 ppm. But when the public complained, he lacked the courage to defend his policy, With a heavy heart, he stepped down. The current Minister of Health is unwilling to talk about legal limits. Instead he stages photo ops in which he eats bread to demonstrate its safety.
When the inheritance tax was reduced from 50 percent to 10 percent, it was branded a "tax cut for the rich." To mollify critics. the administration cut taxes across the board, benefiting the middle class as well. Now the criticism is "if everybody gets a tax cut, where's the government going get its money?"
This is the plight of the Ma administration. No matter what it does, it's wrong. The policy team finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. The more panicky it gets, the more mistakes it makes. The more mistakes it makes, the more it gets criticized. The more it gets criticized, the less confident it becomes. The less confident it becomes, the more panicky it gets.
During the five months Ma Ying-jeou has been in office, everything has gone wrong, mostly due to external factors. Natural disasters have struck one after another. Add to this global inflation and a once in a century global financial tidal wave, and countless nations find themselves in a state of crisis. Applying the same standards to all of them, then the hardship the public is experiencing cannot be blamed on Ma Ying-jeou. Nevertheless, the opposition DPP has chosen to oppose the ruling administration out of sheer orneriness. For example, the contaminated milk scandal was turned into an anti-Ma campaign. The DPP trotted out demagogic non sequiteurs such as "The lives of Taiwanese have less value than Chinese pigs." But when we learned that 2.5 ppm was the internationally recognized safety standard for melamine levels, the Democratic Progressive Party refused to utter a single "Sorry." Instead, Lin Fang-yu was forced to step down for no good reason. We live in an Age of Unreason.
That said, Ma Ying-jeou's elite team has not demonstrated a capacity to turn crises into opportunities. Instead it has revealed an embarrassing tendency to panic in the face of emergencies, and an extraordinary clumsiness in dealing with crises. It is always behind the curve. Its leadership style has failed to instill public confidence. Instead, it has lost the respect of the public. This group of officials, utterly lacking in self-confidence, has recently become even more panicky. When hard-nosed legislators asked whether officials who received poor approval ratings in the media should forgo their year-end bonuses, they merely hemmed and hawed. They looked like a bunch of Yes Men whose only question when asked to jump is "How high?" Is it really necessary for government officials to abase themselves like this?
The public often offers unsolicited advice to the Ma administration. It says the administration must improve communication with the public. But the administration remains trapped in the Myth of Public Opinion, constantly looking over its shoulder. Therefore we would like to offer the administration a few suggestions. One. Do not try to please everyone. Trying to please everyone and you will only wind up pleasing no one. The recent tax cuts are the best example, Cut this and you are criticized. Cut that and you are criticized. Cut this and that and you are criticized even more harshly. Meanwhile, governments the world over are somehow able to cut taxes.
Two. You must have the courage to do what's right. If it must be done, then do it. If you are in the right, then you must not waver. You must communicate with the public. In addition to acting in good faith, you must rule in accordance with the law. Authority must be supported by expertise. The contaminated milk scandal is a good example. After sacrificing Lin Fang-yu for no reason, the Ministry of Health still has not given us a clear account of events. Meanwhile, didn't Central Bank President Peng Huai-nang's proposal that foreign exchange reserves be used for a "sovereign fund" meet with public approval? Didn't the public praise his courage? This shows us the public is not entirely incapable of understanding reason.
Three. Because people are not entirely incapable of understanding reason, the right direction must be explained to them. One need not appease mobs. A Blue vs. Green standoff prevails on Taiwan. Every issue is polarized. If the administration wants to get things done, it must show determination. In the face of unwarranted verbal abuse such as "Taiwanese people are valued less than Chinese pigs," the administration's response must not be terrified silence. The Ministry of Education's response to demands that it restore the official name "Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall" must not be to pass the buck to a "citizens forum." Otherwise why turn decision-making power over to you in the first place?
Four. Communicating with the public does not mean interfering with the media. Some of the Ma administration's behavior toward the media has been questionable. If officials clearly misspoke, the administration may not demand a retraction. Recent the China Broadcasting Company and Central News Agency have been careful to avoid accusations of featherbedding and interference in the freedom of the press. Those in power should not expect to be media darlings. Those in power have no right to expect the media to be "friendly."
Times are hard on those in power. Ma, Liu and other ivory tower intellectuals rule the nation. Now they realize how hard the job can be on the minds and bodies, and how thick the Fog of War can become. External factors cannot be controlled. One's leadership style however, is one's own responsibility. The policy team must act courageously, communicate effectively, and rebuild its credibility.
化險為夷，主政者不可遇亂則亂
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.20 02:02 am
那一廂，是一個儉樸成性、請外賓吃便當、號召官員不收花不送禮的馬英九。這一廂，是一個受到花農抱怨之後，如今在鎂光燈直擊下，鞋店裡付錢買新鞋以刺激景氣的馬英九。
那一廂，是一個率先訂下三聚氰胺二點五ppm安全標準，但在眾怒之下不敢大聲為政策辯護，只好黯然下台的前任衛生署長。這一廂，是一個絕口不再說出檢測數字標準，努力在鏡頭前表演大口吃麵包的現任衛生署長。
那一廂，是一個將遺產稅率由百分之五十猛降為百分之十，卻被罵為「圖利富人」的賦稅新方案。這一廂，是一個為了安撫異議，只好一併調降綜所稅以嘉惠中產階級，結果又被質疑「大家都減稅，政府錢從哪裡來」的兩難局面。
這就是現在馬政府的困境，簡直是怎麼做怎麼錯。其結果，施政團隊陷入「慌了手腳→越做越錯→越錯越挨罵→越挨罵越沒信心→越沒信心就越慌了手腳」的惡性循環。
馬英九上任五個月，諸事不順，大部分出於外在環境因素。除了天災不斷，還加上國際性的通貨膨脹，以及「世紀僅見」的全球金融海嘯。多少國家都在危機總動 員，故若持平而觀，民眾度小月，不能全怪馬英九。同時，在野黨為反對而反對，例如藉毒奶事件擴大「反中打馬」戰線，亂罵「台灣人命不如中國豬」來煽風點 火，結果卻證明二點五ppm乃國際接受的安全標準，民進黨卻一點理虧的樣子也無，反倒是林芳郁冤枉下台徒留憾事。這的確是一個難以理喻的時代。
但話說回來，馬英九率領著精英團隊，並未發揮「化險為夷」的處理能力，反而顯現了「遇亂則亂」的窘態，格外拙於應付危機。該反應的時候慢半拍，該展示領袖 風範時卻沒能安定人心，終於失去了民眾的尊重。而一群毫無自信的官員更加亂了手腳，連立委強悍追問是否民調差就該取消年終獎金，都見人事行政首長唯唯諾 諾，一副即刻「遵命」的模樣。政府官員何以弱勢至此？
輿論常「指教」馬政府，要加強與民眾的溝通，卻見政府又常因此卡在民意的迷思上，凡事瞻前顧後。在此，我們給政府幾個具體建議：第一，不要想討好所有的 人，想要面面討好，結果一定面面不討好。最近減稅方案就是最好的例子，減這個也有人罵，減那個也有人罵，「統統有減」之後繼續被罵。但如今不是全球各國都 陸續推出減稅改革嗎？
所以，第二，對的事就勇敢去做，據理就要力爭，理直就要氣壯。與民眾「溝通」，除了誠意之外，也要用依法行政、公權力執行、專業權威作後盾。毒奶事件即是 一例，平白犧牲林芳郁之後，何以衛生署至今仍未敢把事件道理說個清楚？相對之下，央行總裁彭淮南於動用外匯存底作「主權基金」的建議不假辭色，不也眾聲叫 好，讚其擔當？可見民眾不會完全不明事理。
第三，正因為民眾不至於完全不明事理，所以更要向大眾解釋正確方向，不必屈從所有的民意。台灣存在藍綠對立的背景，凡事皆有分裂的意見。政府如果勇於任 事，就應擇善固執。如果面對「台灣人不如中國豬」的無理謾罵只能噤聲，教育部連個中正紀念堂復名議題都說要交由「公民論壇」決定，則決策權到底在誰手裡？
第四，話說回來，與民意溝通，不代表可插手媒體。馬政府與媒體互動，有些事做得不大漂亮。如果明明是政府官員說錯話，不能反過來硬要媒體更正；又像是最近 的央廣與中央社等話題，更該小心避免人事酬庸和「干涉新聞自由」的指責。執政者不可能再是媒體寵兒，也沒道理企求媒體「友善」。
沒錯，這是一個對執政者極不友善的年代，馬劉等人書生治國，現在才真正面臨「苦其心志，空乏其身，行拂亂其所為」的震撼挑戰。唯外在大環境難以掌控，內部領導風格更要靠自己建立，執政團隊要勉力走回「果敢任事，有效溝通，重建公信力」的良性循環。
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wang Yung-ching: The Republic of China Industrialist Who Most Deserves Our Respect
Wang Yung-ching: The Republic of China Industrialist Who Most Deserves Our Respect
United Daily News editorial
A Translation
October 17, 2008
The "Wizard of Entrepreneurship" Wang Yung-ching is dead. Both the ruling and opposition parties are sincere in mourning his passing. The legend of Wang Yung-ching spans more than half a century, and parallels Taiwan's economic miracle. More importantly, Wang Yung-ching's ascetic personal style, along with his bold and aggressive business style, has become the model for Taiwan businesses. The verdict is that Wang Yung-ching was a Captain of Industry. More than that, he was a shining example for entrepreneurs everywhere.
This industrialist never had a moment's rest. Right up until the moment of his death, he traveled overseas conducting inspections of his business operations. Not one day of his 92 year life was wasted. At 16 he borrowed 200 NT to start his own rice business. At 38 he wrote to Minister of Economic Affairs Yin Chung, asking for permission to invest in the plastics industry. It was then that Taiwan's petrochemical industry took its first step. Today, the annual output of the Formosa Plastics Group is 2.6 trillion NT. It employs over 80,000 workers. Two hundred NT, transformed into two trillion NT. Wang Yung-ching is not merely a legendary individual. He is a symbol of Taiwan's miraculous transformation from an agricultural society into an industrial society.
Wang Yung-ching was dubbed the "Wizard of Entrepreneurship" many years ago. But the success enjoyed by Wang Yung-ching and the Formosa Plastics Group is not the result of luck. It is the result of Wang's tenacity and perseverance. This entrepreneur, who had only an elementary school education, was not satisfied merely with the success of his rice business and lumber business. He was not satisfied with the dominance of his plastics empire. He wanted to establish the world's most advanced industries, in petroleum distillation, medical technology, biotechnology, electronics, optoelectronics, semiconductors. He continually renewed the Formosa Plastics Group, advancing with the times, never falling from his position of leadership.
Wang Yung-ching's businesses were not immune to setbacks and failures. The Formosa Plastics automobile plant and the mainland China Haicang plan failed to pan out as expected. His Formosa Chemicals and Fiber Corporation was targeted by the environmental movement. His plans for an Ilan Litse plant were blocked. These setbacks reflected the tide and times businesses had to bear. Wang Yung-ching never evaded such problems. If the times presented him with problems, he welcomed the opportunity to solve them. In fact, that very wave of social reform inspired the Formosa Plastics Sixth Naphtha Cracking Plant Project in Miaoli. It inspired his plan for green and organic crop cultivation. Taiwan's aging population inspired the creation of a "Health Village." The predictable energy shortage inspired the establishment of numerous gas turbine electrical cogeneration projects. Not all of these projects bore fruit, but they all reflected Wang Yung-ching's endless creativity and his vision of a brighter future.
Just a few days before Wang Yung-ching's death, a list of Taiwan's most profitable businesses was released. At the top of the list was the Formosa Plastics Group. This was not surprising. The "Four Jewels of the Formosa Plastics Group" have long been the most robust, dependable, and highest yielding of Taiwan's blue chip stocks. Among the top 10 money-making consortiums, the Formosa Plastics Group is the only industrial firm. The rest are financial holding companies. Formosa Plastics has maintained its position as an industrial firm. It has refused to be swept up by recent trends in the financial industry. This underscores Wang Yung-ching's pragmatic and responsible style, and his accurate business judgement. He has never allowed financial considerations to limit his business decisions. This sort of socially responsibile behavior has earned Wang Yung-ching the trust of the community.
During times wracked by endless political turmoil, the Formosa Plastics family seldom became involved in public disputes. During times of financial instability, the Formosa Plastics Group avoided stepping on any land mines. During times plagued by endemic corruption, the Formosa Plastics Group has never been involved in scandals. Wang Yung-ching has sustained the legend of Formosa Plastics for half a century. His secret was not merely extraordinary courage, clearer vision, or more accurate calculations. His secret was his determination to establish a rigorous and effective business ethic, to impose strict standards upon himself in his pursuit of profit. Contrast this with the questionable relationships between politicians and businessmen and the rampant corporate opportunism that prevails today.
Compared to Koo Chen-fu, Wang Yung-ching lacked literary refinement. Compared to Morris Chang, Wang Yung-ching lacked an international outlook. Compared to Terry Gou, Wang Yung-ching lacked the high roller's willingness roll the dice. But decade after decade, Wang Yung-ching was visionary without being utopian, pragmatic without being staid, decisive without being impulsive. This sort of integrity is the essence of Taiwan's entrepreneurial spirit. In a moving speech he warned his children: "Wealth is merely something society permits us to temporarily manage and put to proper use." For half a century, two generations of people have worked for the companies he established. His contribution to Taiwan's economy, is hardly limited to being the founder of the Formosa Plastics empire.
Wang Yung-ching was born in Xindian. He made his fortune in Chiayi. His investments straddle Taiwan and the rest of the world. He died in New York. He will be buried in Taipei. Wang Yung-ching was a legend who stands astride space and time. Mr. Wang Yung-ching is the Republic of China Industrialist who most deserves our respect. He earned it.
王永慶─中華民國最值得尊敬的企業家
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.17 02:54 am
經營之神王永慶逝世，朝野俱見真誠的悲悼。一部王永慶個人傳奇，不但在半個多世紀以來與台灣經濟奇蹟同步；更重要的是，王永慶素樸內斂卻又豪放進取的風格，儼然已成台灣企業的典範。社會的口碑是：王永慶是「大企業家」，更是足以垂範永世的「偉大企業家」。
這位永不休息的經營者，直到他長眠前的一刻，還在越洋旅行進行業務考察。他九十二年的人生，可謂沒有一天虛度。從十六歲用借來的兩百元資金開了自己的米 行，到三十八歲那年寫信向經濟部長尹仲容自薦投資塑膠工業，邁出台灣石化工業的腳步；如今，台塑集團每年產值高達二點六兆，雇用了八萬多名工作者。兩百元 到兩兆多的變化，王永慶寫下的不只是他個人的傳奇，也是台灣從農業社會向工業社會蛻變的精采歷程。
雖然早就得到「經營之神」的稱譽，但王永慶和台塑集團的成功絕非僥倖，而是憑著堅韌的毅力，千錘百鍊出來的成果。這位僅有小學學歷的企業家，沒有滿足於米 行、木材行的成就，沒有佇足於塑膠王國的霸業，而是一路以全球先進產業為師，一路向輕油裂解、醫療、生物科技、電子半導體和光電等領域挺進，始終保持台塑 集團日新又新、與時俱進的領先地位於不墜。
王永慶的事業並非從未遭遇挫折與失敗。黯然結束的台朔汽車廠，功敗垂成的大陸海滄計畫，都未能如預期拓展。包括當年在環保運動中備受批評的台化公司，以及 在宜蘭利澤建廠受阻的計畫，都反映了企業在大時代浪潮中必須承受的衝擊。王永慶從不逃避問題，時代丟給他一個題目，他必正面迎對，想出解決辦法。正因為那 一波強大的社運浪潮，台塑有了在麥寮填海的六輕計畫，以及順勢而生的綠化及有機栽植計畫；就像因應台灣人口老化而有了「養生村」的成立，預見能源短缺而有 了多項汽電共生事業。這些事業雖未必皆有成績，但反映了王永慶轉動不停的頭腦與海闊天空的創意與企圖。
就在王永慶去世前幾日公布的台灣「最會賺錢」的企業中，台塑集團高居第一，這並不令人意外。長期以來，台灣股市的績優股，「台塑四寶」一直以其穩健、誠 信，獲利率高被列為指標。比較值得注意的是，在十大賺錢的財團中，台塑集團是唯一的製造業集團，其餘皆為金控集團。台塑保持其「製造業本位」的立場，沒有 涉足狂熱的金融浪潮，凸顯了王永慶的務實與負責的風格：以其精明準確，卻始終不願從事以錢套利的生意。這種有為有守，正是王永慶深受社會信賴的原因。
在政治波瀾不斷的年代，台塑家族極少捲入色彩爭議；在經濟泡沫的危機，台塑集團沒有誤蹈地雷；在貪瀆成風的時代，以台塑集團之龐大從未傳出非法醜聞。可以 想見，王永慶能維持台塑傳奇半世紀的屹立，祕訣不止是膽識過人、眼光獨到或精準算計而已；更令人嘆服的，是他建立了一套有效而嚴謹的企業倫理及軌範，並在 自我嚴格要求的標準中追求利潤。這點，對照今天台灣政商關係混濁，及企業浮華投機成風的情境，更是不易。
比起辜振甫，他少了一分文采；比起張忠謀，他少了豐富的國際背景；比起郭台銘，他沒有那種一擲千金的霸氣。但王永慶數十年如一日的兢兢業業，前瞻而不浮 誇、務實而不保守、果斷而不失穩健；這種正直及負責的品質，才是最珍貴的台灣企業精神。令人動容的是，他告誡子女：「財富只是社會讓我們暫時保管的錢，一 定要好好使用。」半世紀來，在他建立的企業中工作過的已超過兩代台灣人；他對台灣經濟的貢獻，絕對比台塑王國的基業要廣闊、深遠得多。
生於新店，發跡於嘉義，投資遍及台灣和全球，死於紐約，將安葬於台北，王永慶寫下的經營傳奇，不僅穿越了時代，也跨越了地域。稱王永慶先生為中華民國最值得尊敬的企業家，他當之無愧。
United Daily News editorial
A Translation
October 17, 2008
The "Wizard of Entrepreneurship" Wang Yung-ching is dead. Both the ruling and opposition parties are sincere in mourning his passing. The legend of Wang Yung-ching spans more than half a century, and parallels Taiwan's economic miracle. More importantly, Wang Yung-ching's ascetic personal style, along with his bold and aggressive business style, has become the model for Taiwan businesses. The verdict is that Wang Yung-ching was a Captain of Industry. More than that, he was a shining example for entrepreneurs everywhere.
This industrialist never had a moment's rest. Right up until the moment of his death, he traveled overseas conducting inspections of his business operations. Not one day of his 92 year life was wasted. At 16 he borrowed 200 NT to start his own rice business. At 38 he wrote to Minister of Economic Affairs Yin Chung, asking for permission to invest in the plastics industry. It was then that Taiwan's petrochemical industry took its first step. Today, the annual output of the Formosa Plastics Group is 2.6 trillion NT. It employs over 80,000 workers. Two hundred NT, transformed into two trillion NT. Wang Yung-ching is not merely a legendary individual. He is a symbol of Taiwan's miraculous transformation from an agricultural society into an industrial society.
Wang Yung-ching was dubbed the "Wizard of Entrepreneurship" many years ago. But the success enjoyed by Wang Yung-ching and the Formosa Plastics Group is not the result of luck. It is the result of Wang's tenacity and perseverance. This entrepreneur, who had only an elementary school education, was not satisfied merely with the success of his rice business and lumber business. He was not satisfied with the dominance of his plastics empire. He wanted to establish the world's most advanced industries, in petroleum distillation, medical technology, biotechnology, electronics, optoelectronics, semiconductors. He continually renewed the Formosa Plastics Group, advancing with the times, never falling from his position of leadership.
Wang Yung-ching's businesses were not immune to setbacks and failures. The Formosa Plastics automobile plant and the mainland China Haicang plan failed to pan out as expected. His Formosa Chemicals and Fiber Corporation was targeted by the environmental movement. His plans for an Ilan Litse plant were blocked. These setbacks reflected the tide and times businesses had to bear. Wang Yung-ching never evaded such problems. If the times presented him with problems, he welcomed the opportunity to solve them. In fact, that very wave of social reform inspired the Formosa Plastics Sixth Naphtha Cracking Plant Project in Miaoli. It inspired his plan for green and organic crop cultivation. Taiwan's aging population inspired the creation of a "Health Village." The predictable energy shortage inspired the establishment of numerous gas turbine electrical cogeneration projects. Not all of these projects bore fruit, but they all reflected Wang Yung-ching's endless creativity and his vision of a brighter future.
Just a few days before Wang Yung-ching's death, a list of Taiwan's most profitable businesses was released. At the top of the list was the Formosa Plastics Group. This was not surprising. The "Four Jewels of the Formosa Plastics Group" have long been the most robust, dependable, and highest yielding of Taiwan's blue chip stocks. Among the top 10 money-making consortiums, the Formosa Plastics Group is the only industrial firm. The rest are financial holding companies. Formosa Plastics has maintained its position as an industrial firm. It has refused to be swept up by recent trends in the financial industry. This underscores Wang Yung-ching's pragmatic and responsible style, and his accurate business judgement. He has never allowed financial considerations to limit his business decisions. This sort of socially responsibile behavior has earned Wang Yung-ching the trust of the community.
During times wracked by endless political turmoil, the Formosa Plastics family seldom became involved in public disputes. During times of financial instability, the Formosa Plastics Group avoided stepping on any land mines. During times plagued by endemic corruption, the Formosa Plastics Group has never been involved in scandals. Wang Yung-ching has sustained the legend of Formosa Plastics for half a century. His secret was not merely extraordinary courage, clearer vision, or more accurate calculations. His secret was his determination to establish a rigorous and effective business ethic, to impose strict standards upon himself in his pursuit of profit. Contrast this with the questionable relationships between politicians and businessmen and the rampant corporate opportunism that prevails today.
Compared to Koo Chen-fu, Wang Yung-ching lacked literary refinement. Compared to Morris Chang, Wang Yung-ching lacked an international outlook. Compared to Terry Gou, Wang Yung-ching lacked the high roller's willingness roll the dice. But decade after decade, Wang Yung-ching was visionary without being utopian, pragmatic without being staid, decisive without being impulsive. This sort of integrity is the essence of Taiwan's entrepreneurial spirit. In a moving speech he warned his children: "Wealth is merely something society permits us to temporarily manage and put to proper use." For half a century, two generations of people have worked for the companies he established. His contribution to Taiwan's economy, is hardly limited to being the founder of the Formosa Plastics empire.
Wang Yung-ching was born in Xindian. He made his fortune in Chiayi. His investments straddle Taiwan and the rest of the world. He died in New York. He will be buried in Taipei. Wang Yung-ching was a legend who stands astride space and time. Mr. Wang Yung-ching is the Republic of China Industrialist who most deserves our respect. He earned it.
王永慶─中華民國最值得尊敬的企業家
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.17 02:54 am
經營之神王永慶逝世，朝野俱見真誠的悲悼。一部王永慶個人傳奇，不但在半個多世紀以來與台灣經濟奇蹟同步；更重要的是，王永慶素樸內斂卻又豪放進取的風格，儼然已成台灣企業的典範。社會的口碑是：王永慶是「大企業家」，更是足以垂範永世的「偉大企業家」。
這位永不休息的經營者，直到他長眠前的一刻，還在越洋旅行進行業務考察。他九十二年的人生，可謂沒有一天虛度。從十六歲用借來的兩百元資金開了自己的米 行，到三十八歲那年寫信向經濟部長尹仲容自薦投資塑膠工業，邁出台灣石化工業的腳步；如今，台塑集團每年產值高達二點六兆，雇用了八萬多名工作者。兩百元 到兩兆多的變化，王永慶寫下的不只是他個人的傳奇，也是台灣從農業社會向工業社會蛻變的精采歷程。
雖然早就得到「經營之神」的稱譽，但王永慶和台塑集團的成功絕非僥倖，而是憑著堅韌的毅力，千錘百鍊出來的成果。這位僅有小學學歷的企業家，沒有滿足於米 行、木材行的成就，沒有佇足於塑膠王國的霸業，而是一路以全球先進產業為師，一路向輕油裂解、醫療、生物科技、電子半導體和光電等領域挺進，始終保持台塑 集團日新又新、與時俱進的領先地位於不墜。
王永慶的事業並非從未遭遇挫折與失敗。黯然結束的台朔汽車廠，功敗垂成的大陸海滄計畫，都未能如預期拓展。包括當年在環保運動中備受批評的台化公司，以及 在宜蘭利澤建廠受阻的計畫，都反映了企業在大時代浪潮中必須承受的衝擊。王永慶從不逃避問題，時代丟給他一個題目，他必正面迎對，想出解決辦法。正因為那 一波強大的社運浪潮，台塑有了在麥寮填海的六輕計畫，以及順勢而生的綠化及有機栽植計畫；就像因應台灣人口老化而有了「養生村」的成立，預見能源短缺而有 了多項汽電共生事業。這些事業雖未必皆有成績，但反映了王永慶轉動不停的頭腦與海闊天空的創意與企圖。
就在王永慶去世前幾日公布的台灣「最會賺錢」的企業中，台塑集團高居第一，這並不令人意外。長期以來，台灣股市的績優股，「台塑四寶」一直以其穩健、誠 信，獲利率高被列為指標。比較值得注意的是，在十大賺錢的財團中，台塑集團是唯一的製造業集團，其餘皆為金控集團。台塑保持其「製造業本位」的立場，沒有 涉足狂熱的金融浪潮，凸顯了王永慶的務實與負責的風格：以其精明準確，卻始終不願從事以錢套利的生意。這種有為有守，正是王永慶深受社會信賴的原因。
在政治波瀾不斷的年代，台塑家族極少捲入色彩爭議；在經濟泡沫的危機，台塑集團沒有誤蹈地雷；在貪瀆成風的時代，以台塑集團之龐大從未傳出非法醜聞。可以 想見，王永慶能維持台塑傳奇半世紀的屹立，祕訣不止是膽識過人、眼光獨到或精準算計而已；更令人嘆服的，是他建立了一套有效而嚴謹的企業倫理及軌範，並在 自我嚴格要求的標準中追求利潤。這點，對照今天台灣政商關係混濁，及企業浮華投機成風的情境，更是不易。
比起辜振甫，他少了一分文采；比起張忠謀，他少了豐富的國際背景；比起郭台銘，他沒有那種一擲千金的霸氣。但王永慶數十年如一日的兢兢業業，前瞻而不浮 誇、務實而不保守、果斷而不失穩健；這種正直及負責的品質，才是最珍貴的台灣企業精神。令人動容的是，他告誡子女：「財富只是社會讓我們暫時保管的錢，一 定要好好使用。」半世紀來，在他建立的企業中工作過的已超過兩代台灣人；他對台灣經濟的貢獻，絕對比台塑王國的基業要廣闊、深遠得多。
生於新店，發跡於嘉義，投資遍及台灣和全球，死於紐約，將安葬於台北，王永慶寫下的經營傳奇，不僅穿越了時代，也跨越了地域。稱王永慶先生為中華民國最值得尊敬的企業家，他當之無愧。
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Tsai Ing-wen: DPP Savior or Sinner?
Tsai Ing-wen: DPP Savior or Sinner?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 16, 2008
Tsai Ing-wen is the Chairperson of the Democratic Progressive Party, at what is unquestionably a watershed moment in history. Her central mission should be to lead the DPP out of the nightmare created by Chen Shui-bian. She must not allow the DPP to fall back into Chen Shui-bian's clutches.
Tsai Ing-wen herself said her goal was to create an "era without Chen Shui-bian" for the Democratic Progressive Party. Now however, the DPP is slipping out of Tsai Ing-wen's grasp. It is once again becoming Chen Shui-bian's hostage. Tsai Ing-wen was originally seen as the savior of the DPP. If she fails to live up to her historic mission, will she instead become the DPP's irredeemable sinner?
Tsai Ing-wen failed to set standards of right and wrong for the Democratic Progressive Party. She failed to make a clean break with Chen Shui-bian. Now Chen Shui-bian is billing himself as "Ma Ying-jeou's first political prisoner," as the "standard bearer for Taiwan independence," and the "founder of a Taiwan independence trust fund." He is joining the DPP's protest march against Chen Yunlin. The march has become Chen Shui-bian's political baptism. The Green camp will forgive his sins. It will grant him a special dispensation or amnesty. The march has become Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation ceremony. Once again, he will again ascend to the throne, as the "Godfather of Taiwan independence" and the "spiritual leader of the DPP." Once that happens, the DPP will no longer be able to break with A Bian, in spirit or in practice. Even the DPP's provision that "if Chen is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party" will not rid the DPP of Chen Shui-bian.
Some people within the Democratic Progressive Party are aware of the danger. Some want Chen Shui-bian to stay away from the march, "even if they have to get down on their knees and beg." Others suggest that if Chen Shui-bian joins the march, "he must not be allowed to ascend the podium." But who is willing to kneel before Chen Shui-bian? Will kneeling before Chen Shui-bian motivate him to give the DPP a break? Actually, for all intents and purposes, the DPP has been kneeling before Chen Shui-bian since March 22. It has been hoping for mercy. It has been hoping for a way out. Yet Chen Shui-bian has chosen to rest his boot on Tsai Ing-wen's neck and mock her as weak and incompetent. Tsai Ing-wen thinks politics is a duty and a calling. Chen Shui-bian thinks politics is a game of life and death.
Tsai Ing-wen has already become a victim of a domino effect she herself arranged. She failed to denounce Chen Shui-bian's greed and corruption when she had the chance. She failed to challenge Chen Shui-bian's claim to be the "standard-bearer for Taiwan independence." She was unable to repudiate Chen's claim as "standard-bearer for Taiwan independence" because she failed to establish a standard for right and wrong. She missed one opportunity after another to repudiate Chen Shui-bian. Chen Shui-bian took advantage of every opportunity she offered him. Eventually Huang Ching-ling created a scene at DPP Party Headquarters. The DPP Central Committee, having declared that "if Chen is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party," was unable to refute Chen's brand of Taiwan independence, and had no excuse to prevent Chen Shui-bian from joining the march. If A Bian can join the protest march, why can't he shake hands with Tsai Ing-wen? If he can shake hands with Tsai Ing-wen, why can't he march beside her? If he can march beside her, why can't he speak from the same podium? If he can speak from the same podium, why can't he participate in the same candlelight vigil? How therefore, can this so-called 500,000 person mass movement not become a political baptism for Chen Shui-bian? How can it not become a rehabilitation ceremony for Chen Shui-bian, the alleged "standard-bearer for the Taiwan independence movement." Looking ahead to next year's County and Municipality Elections, who will stop Chen Shui-bian from ascending the podium and endorsing the DPP? Looking ahead, suppose Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the first instance and sentenced to a maximum of 10 years in prison, but remains eligible to run for president? Chen opposed the DPP Committee for Clean Government's move to expel him in the event he is found guilty. Chen is unwilling to relinquish the possibility of running for re-election on behalf of the DPP. Looking forward, when Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the third instance, can the DPP Central Committee forbid the masses to take to the streets to demand amnesty? Looking forward, if Chen Shui-bian is granted amnesty, won't he return to lead the DPP?
Tsai Ing-wen's historic mission is to create a Democratic Progressive Party that doesn't include Chen Shui-bian. Ironically, she has allowed the DPP to slip back into Chen Shui-bian's clutches. Actually, toward the end of President Chen Shui-bian term of office, Tsai Ing-wen had her own feelings about Chen and the DPP. The turned down a medal Chen Shui-bian presented in her honor. She turned down the SEF chairmanship. She turned down the position of Campaign Manager for the Hsieh/Su presidential ticket, Taipei City region. Also, when she was elected party chairman, her first thought was to "save the party by dumping A Bian." Who would have imagined she would wind up presiding over Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation? Is Fate toying with Man? Or is Man creating his own Fate? Who knew it would come to this?
Tsai Ing-wen blundered, through a soft heart and a soft head. She mistakenly assumed Chen Shui-bian lacked the ability to destroy the Democratic Progressive Party, yet again. Chen Shui-bian wants to hijack the DPP, yet again. He wants to shatter Tsai Ing-wen's dream of "saving the party by dumping A Bian." If Tsai Ing-wen dares to lash back at Chen Shui-bian, she will be pelted with water bottles thrown by the mob. Tsai Ing-wen realizes she is no match for A Bian, the "Comeback Kid." Her conscience has been dulled; her sense of mission diluted. A terror that the mob will reject her is her overriding concern. As a result, during Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation ceremony, Tsai Ing-wen might just earn that medal Chen Shui-bian tried to give her.
Visualize if you will, Tsai Ing-wen and Chen Shui-bian marching, side by side. Visualize if you will, Tsai Ing-wen and Chen Shui-bian maintaining a candlelight vigil, side by side. Now visualize Tsai Ing-wen marching with Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, side by side. Now visualize Tsai Ing-wen maintaining a candlelight vigil with Alberto Fujimori of Peru, side by side. Tsai Ing-wen, are you the same Tsai Ing-wen elected DPP Chairperson on May 18?
蔡英文是民進黨的救星或罪人？
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.16 02:57 am
毫無疑問，蔡英文在這個歷史關頭出任民進黨主席，她的核心使命應是帶領民進黨走出陳水扁的夢魘，而不是將民進黨再度交回陳水扁的魔掌之中。
因此，蔡英文才會說，她要為民進黨開創一個「沒有陳水扁的時代」。但是，如今卻眼看著民進黨將從蔡英文的手裡，重新回到陳水扁的挾持之下。原本被視為民進黨救星的蔡英文若是辜負了她的歷史使命，她會不會成為民進黨萬劫不復的罪人？
蔡英文未能明快果敢地建立民進黨的「大是大非」，未能及時與陳水扁切割；如今陳水扁將以「馬英九的第一個政治犯」及「台獨旗手」、「建國基金金主」的身 分，參加民進黨抗議陳雲林來訪的大遊行。對於陳水扁來說，這場大遊行儼然是一場政治洗禮，他的一切罪孽將獲得綠營的理解、寬容或赦免；這場大遊行也形同一 場復辟大典，他將再度坐上「台獨教主」與「民進黨精神領袖」的神聖王座。此後，民進黨將再也無法在精神上或實體上與扁切割，即使「一審有罪除名」也不可能 甩掉陳水扁。
民進黨內當然有人看得出這個危機，甚至有人主張勸請阿扁不要參加遊行，「就算用跪的也得跪！」另有人主張，即使陳水扁參加遊行，「也絕對不可讓扁上台！」 然而，誰去跪陳水扁？跪了陳水扁他就會放過你民進黨？其實，三二二以後，民進黨不啻就是跪對陳水扁，希望他能有一念慈悲，放黨一條生路，但陳水扁竟踩在蔡 英文屈膝的弓背上睥睨譏嘲她的懦弱無能。蔡英文以為政治是「負責任的志業」，陳水扁卻認定政治就是「妳死我活」。
蔡英文已經陷於自己親手排列的骨牌效應之中：未能在第一時間批判陳水扁的貪與腐，因此亦未能在第一時間否定陳水扁作為「台獨旗手」的地位；由於「大是大 非」未能確立，並一再錯失切割時機，使得「有縫就鑽／有風就飛」的陳水扁，終於累積出黃慶林大鬧黨中央的局面；既然黨中央認定「一審有罪再說」，又不能駁 正「扁記台獨」的政治操作，遂亦不能禁阻陳水扁參加遊行。而扁既能參加遊行，為何不能與蔡英文見面握手？既能見面握手，為何不能並肩遊行？既能並肩遊行， 為何不能同台演講？既能同台演講，為何不能同場守夜？如此一來，這場號稱五十萬人的群眾活動，豈不成了陳水扁去罪化的政治洗禮？又豈不成了陳水扁「台獨旗 手」的復辟大典？接下來，往前推測，一直到明年底縣市長選舉，難道誰能阻止陳水扁為民進黨站台？再往前推，陳水扁若一審判刑十年以下，將仍具參選總統資 格，這是他反對廉政會「一審有罪除名」的原因，因為他不願喪失再代表民進黨參選總統的可能性；再往前推，陳水扁三審定讞時，黨中央又如何禁阻群眾上街主張 特赦？再往前推，陳水扁若蒙特赦，難道不會「再回來領導」民進黨？
蔡英文自期的歷史使命是「開創一個沒有陳水扁的民進黨」，但是如今她卻將民進黨一步一步交回陳水扁的魔掌之中。其實，在陳水扁總統任期後段，蔡英文對當時 的陳水扁與民進黨皆有其心證及評價，她婉謝了陳水扁為她贈勳，拒絕了陳水扁欲任命她出任海基會董事長等職，並回絕出任「謝蘇配」的台北市競選總幹事；然 而，她出任黨主席，原本自當亦有「去扁救黨」的思維，不料如今竟然可能成為親手為陳水扁籌辦復辟大典的黨主席。天作孽耶？自作孽耶？造化弄人，竟至於斯！
蔡英文顯係誤於一念之仁與一念之愚，錯以為陳水扁沒有「二度摧毀」民進黨的能力，更錯以為陳水扁沒有摧毀她蔡英文的能力；但是，陳水扁如今非但要再次挾持 民進黨，也要使蔡英文「去扁救黨」的天真幻夢徹底摧毀。蔡英文此時若敢回擊陳水扁，她也必將遭台下群眾丟寶特瓶。蔡英文已經驚覺自己技不如扁，回天乏術； 她的良知與使命感漸漸退縮與扭曲，害怕遭群眾唾棄的恐懼成為她的主宰意識。於是，在陳水扁的復辟大典上，蔡英文將可實至名歸地領受陳水扁頒給她的勳獎。
蔡英文與陳水扁並肩遊行，蔡英文與陳水扁同場守夜；這幅場景，猶如蔡英文簇擁馬可仕在菲律賓遊行，蔡英文陪同藤森在秘魯守夜。蔡主席，妳仍是五月十八日當選的那一位蔡主席嗎？
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 16, 2008
Tsai Ing-wen is the Chairperson of the Democratic Progressive Party, at what is unquestionably a watershed moment in history. Her central mission should be to lead the DPP out of the nightmare created by Chen Shui-bian. She must not allow the DPP to fall back into Chen Shui-bian's clutches.
Tsai Ing-wen herself said her goal was to create an "era without Chen Shui-bian" for the Democratic Progressive Party. Now however, the DPP is slipping out of Tsai Ing-wen's grasp. It is once again becoming Chen Shui-bian's hostage. Tsai Ing-wen was originally seen as the savior of the DPP. If she fails to live up to her historic mission, will she instead become the DPP's irredeemable sinner?
Tsai Ing-wen failed to set standards of right and wrong for the Democratic Progressive Party. She failed to make a clean break with Chen Shui-bian. Now Chen Shui-bian is billing himself as "Ma Ying-jeou's first political prisoner," as the "standard bearer for Taiwan independence," and the "founder of a Taiwan independence trust fund." He is joining the DPP's protest march against Chen Yunlin. The march has become Chen Shui-bian's political baptism. The Green camp will forgive his sins. It will grant him a special dispensation or amnesty. The march has become Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation ceremony. Once again, he will again ascend to the throne, as the "Godfather of Taiwan independence" and the "spiritual leader of the DPP." Once that happens, the DPP will no longer be able to break with A Bian, in spirit or in practice. Even the DPP's provision that "if Chen is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party" will not rid the DPP of Chen Shui-bian.
Some people within the Democratic Progressive Party are aware of the danger. Some want Chen Shui-bian to stay away from the march, "even if they have to get down on their knees and beg." Others suggest that if Chen Shui-bian joins the march, "he must not be allowed to ascend the podium." But who is willing to kneel before Chen Shui-bian? Will kneeling before Chen Shui-bian motivate him to give the DPP a break? Actually, for all intents and purposes, the DPP has been kneeling before Chen Shui-bian since March 22. It has been hoping for mercy. It has been hoping for a way out. Yet Chen Shui-bian has chosen to rest his boot on Tsai Ing-wen's neck and mock her as weak and incompetent. Tsai Ing-wen thinks politics is a duty and a calling. Chen Shui-bian thinks politics is a game of life and death.
Tsai Ing-wen has already become a victim of a domino effect she herself arranged. She failed to denounce Chen Shui-bian's greed and corruption when she had the chance. She failed to challenge Chen Shui-bian's claim to be the "standard-bearer for Taiwan independence." She was unable to repudiate Chen's claim as "standard-bearer for Taiwan independence" because she failed to establish a standard for right and wrong. She missed one opportunity after another to repudiate Chen Shui-bian. Chen Shui-bian took advantage of every opportunity she offered him. Eventually Huang Ching-ling created a scene at DPP Party Headquarters. The DPP Central Committee, having declared that "if Chen is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party," was unable to refute Chen's brand of Taiwan independence, and had no excuse to prevent Chen Shui-bian from joining the march. If A Bian can join the protest march, why can't he shake hands with Tsai Ing-wen? If he can shake hands with Tsai Ing-wen, why can't he march beside her? If he can march beside her, why can't he speak from the same podium? If he can speak from the same podium, why can't he participate in the same candlelight vigil? How therefore, can this so-called 500,000 person mass movement not become a political baptism for Chen Shui-bian? How can it not become a rehabilitation ceremony for Chen Shui-bian, the alleged "standard-bearer for the Taiwan independence movement." Looking ahead to next year's County and Municipality Elections, who will stop Chen Shui-bian from ascending the podium and endorsing the DPP? Looking ahead, suppose Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the first instance and sentenced to a maximum of 10 years in prison, but remains eligible to run for president? Chen opposed the DPP Committee for Clean Government's move to expel him in the event he is found guilty. Chen is unwilling to relinquish the possibility of running for re-election on behalf of the DPP. Looking forward, when Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the third instance, can the DPP Central Committee forbid the masses to take to the streets to demand amnesty? Looking forward, if Chen Shui-bian is granted amnesty, won't he return to lead the DPP?
Tsai Ing-wen's historic mission is to create a Democratic Progressive Party that doesn't include Chen Shui-bian. Ironically, she has allowed the DPP to slip back into Chen Shui-bian's clutches. Actually, toward the end of President Chen Shui-bian term of office, Tsai Ing-wen had her own feelings about Chen and the DPP. The turned down a medal Chen Shui-bian presented in her honor. She turned down the SEF chairmanship. She turned down the position of Campaign Manager for the Hsieh/Su presidential ticket, Taipei City region. Also, when she was elected party chairman, her first thought was to "save the party by dumping A Bian." Who would have imagined she would wind up presiding over Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation? Is Fate toying with Man? Or is Man creating his own Fate? Who knew it would come to this?
Tsai Ing-wen blundered, through a soft heart and a soft head. She mistakenly assumed Chen Shui-bian lacked the ability to destroy the Democratic Progressive Party, yet again. Chen Shui-bian wants to hijack the DPP, yet again. He wants to shatter Tsai Ing-wen's dream of "saving the party by dumping A Bian." If Tsai Ing-wen dares to lash back at Chen Shui-bian, she will be pelted with water bottles thrown by the mob. Tsai Ing-wen realizes she is no match for A Bian, the "Comeback Kid." Her conscience has been dulled; her sense of mission diluted. A terror that the mob will reject her is her overriding concern. As a result, during Chen Shui-bian's rehabilitation ceremony, Tsai Ing-wen might just earn that medal Chen Shui-bian tried to give her.
Visualize if you will, Tsai Ing-wen and Chen Shui-bian marching, side by side. Visualize if you will, Tsai Ing-wen and Chen Shui-bian maintaining a candlelight vigil, side by side. Now visualize Tsai Ing-wen marching with Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, side by side. Now visualize Tsai Ing-wen maintaining a candlelight vigil with Alberto Fujimori of Peru, side by side. Tsai Ing-wen, are you the same Tsai Ing-wen elected DPP Chairperson on May 18?
蔡英文是民進黨的救星或罪人？
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.16 02:57 am
毫無疑問，蔡英文在這個歷史關頭出任民進黨主席，她的核心使命應是帶領民進黨走出陳水扁的夢魘，而不是將民進黨再度交回陳水扁的魔掌之中。
因此，蔡英文才會說，她要為民進黨開創一個「沒有陳水扁的時代」。但是，如今卻眼看著民進黨將從蔡英文的手裡，重新回到陳水扁的挾持之下。原本被視為民進黨救星的蔡英文若是辜負了她的歷史使命，她會不會成為民進黨萬劫不復的罪人？
蔡英文未能明快果敢地建立民進黨的「大是大非」，未能及時與陳水扁切割；如今陳水扁將以「馬英九的第一個政治犯」及「台獨旗手」、「建國基金金主」的身 分，參加民進黨抗議陳雲林來訪的大遊行。對於陳水扁來說，這場大遊行儼然是一場政治洗禮，他的一切罪孽將獲得綠營的理解、寬容或赦免；這場大遊行也形同一 場復辟大典，他將再度坐上「台獨教主」與「民進黨精神領袖」的神聖王座。此後，民進黨將再也無法在精神上或實體上與扁切割，即使「一審有罪除名」也不可能 甩掉陳水扁。
民進黨內當然有人看得出這個危機，甚至有人主張勸請阿扁不要參加遊行，「就算用跪的也得跪！」另有人主張，即使陳水扁參加遊行，「也絕對不可讓扁上台！」 然而，誰去跪陳水扁？跪了陳水扁他就會放過你民進黨？其實，三二二以後，民進黨不啻就是跪對陳水扁，希望他能有一念慈悲，放黨一條生路，但陳水扁竟踩在蔡 英文屈膝的弓背上睥睨譏嘲她的懦弱無能。蔡英文以為政治是「負責任的志業」，陳水扁卻認定政治就是「妳死我活」。
蔡英文已經陷於自己親手排列的骨牌效應之中：未能在第一時間批判陳水扁的貪與腐，因此亦未能在第一時間否定陳水扁作為「台獨旗手」的地位；由於「大是大 非」未能確立，並一再錯失切割時機，使得「有縫就鑽／有風就飛」的陳水扁，終於累積出黃慶林大鬧黨中央的局面；既然黨中央認定「一審有罪再說」，又不能駁 正「扁記台獨」的政治操作，遂亦不能禁阻陳水扁參加遊行。而扁既能參加遊行，為何不能與蔡英文見面握手？既能見面握手，為何不能並肩遊行？既能並肩遊行， 為何不能同台演講？既能同台演講，為何不能同場守夜？如此一來，這場號稱五十萬人的群眾活動，豈不成了陳水扁去罪化的政治洗禮？又豈不成了陳水扁「台獨旗 手」的復辟大典？接下來，往前推測，一直到明年底縣市長選舉，難道誰能阻止陳水扁為民進黨站台？再往前推，陳水扁若一審判刑十年以下，將仍具參選總統資 格，這是他反對廉政會「一審有罪除名」的原因，因為他不願喪失再代表民進黨參選總統的可能性；再往前推，陳水扁三審定讞時，黨中央又如何禁阻群眾上街主張 特赦？再往前推，陳水扁若蒙特赦，難道不會「再回來領導」民進黨？
蔡英文自期的歷史使命是「開創一個沒有陳水扁的民進黨」，但是如今她卻將民進黨一步一步交回陳水扁的魔掌之中。其實，在陳水扁總統任期後段，蔡英文對當時 的陳水扁與民進黨皆有其心證及評價，她婉謝了陳水扁為她贈勳，拒絕了陳水扁欲任命她出任海基會董事長等職，並回絕出任「謝蘇配」的台北市競選總幹事；然 而，她出任黨主席，原本自當亦有「去扁救黨」的思維，不料如今竟然可能成為親手為陳水扁籌辦復辟大典的黨主席。天作孽耶？自作孽耶？造化弄人，竟至於斯！
蔡英文顯係誤於一念之仁與一念之愚，錯以為陳水扁沒有「二度摧毀」民進黨的能力，更錯以為陳水扁沒有摧毀她蔡英文的能力；但是，陳水扁如今非但要再次挾持 民進黨，也要使蔡英文「去扁救黨」的天真幻夢徹底摧毀。蔡英文此時若敢回擊陳水扁，她也必將遭台下群眾丟寶特瓶。蔡英文已經驚覺自己技不如扁，回天乏術； 她的良知與使命感漸漸退縮與扭曲，害怕遭群眾唾棄的恐懼成為她的主宰意識。於是，在陳水扁的復辟大典上，蔡英文將可實至名歸地領受陳水扁頒給她的勳獎。
蔡英文與陳水扁並肩遊行，蔡英文與陳水扁同場守夜；這幅場景，猶如蔡英文簇擁馬可仕在菲律賓遊行，蔡英文陪同藤森在秘魯守夜。蔡主席，妳仍是五月十八日當選的那一位蔡主席嗎？
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Taiwan Must Not Be Dragged Down into the Whirlpool
Taiwan Must Not Be Dragged Down into the Whirlpool
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 15, 2008
Abroad, the global financial maelstrom rages. At home, suspicions of corruption surround the Chen family. Add to this a new administration unable to meet the public's expectations, and it's no surprise Taiwan's political scene is in chaos, and Taiwan's economy is in the doldrums. But leave international factors beyond our control aside for the moment. The public on Taiwan has always displayed both gumption and smarts. Is it truly incapable of working through these problems?
The political and economic situation on Taiwan is hardly what the public expected from the three month old Ma administration. The new administration's performance is far from satisfactory. But other factors also deserve our attention. One. The political atmosphere is permeated with nihilism. The ruling and opposition parties are caught in a never-ending tug of war. Politics is not only unable to solve peoples' problems. It has itself become the problem. Two. Political manipulation has bred public cynicism. People exchange abuse at the drop of a hat. They refuse to understand. They lack empathy. Cynicism breeds more cynicism, This breeds more intense anger and deeper depression. Three. The middle class feels alienated. Voices of reason and moderation cannot make themselves heard. Mutual trust is difficult to establish, making distorted values difficult to correct.
The current political scene reminds us of when the Democratic Progressive Party was not yet in power. A stalemate prevails between the ruling and opposition parties. The majority party lacks direction. The minority party uses violence and refuses to cooperate. Rational policymaking is nowhere to be found. The contaminated dairy products scandal is milked for all it is worth. DPP thugs go so far as to choke Yeh Chin-chuan by the neck. The DPP's only response to cross-Strait policy is "No!" Every day Chen Shui-bian visits the countryside and goad the mob into challenging the legal system. Taiwan now finds itself in a whirlpool, spiraling downward, unable to extricate itself. The residue of eight years of corruption from the Chen Shui-bian regime remains. If Taiwan reverts to the mistakes of the past, then weren't the past eight years of suffering all for nothing?
This downward spiral can only lead to Taiwan's death by suffocation. Compared to eight years ago, Taiwan has fewer economic options, less tolerance for "ethnic," i.e., cultural group, differences, more public discontent, less social cohesion, and less ability to solve political problems. Look in the mirror. Taiwan's image as a democracy is in tatters. Can the public possibly be content with the state of the nation?
Lest we forget, when Chen Shui-bian was elected president eight years ago, his slogan was "We must sink or swim." Not only did he not lead Taiwan into the light, his political corruption and moral degradation dragged Taiwan down along with him into the darkness. Chen Shui-bian has misused his authority to incite discontent among the masses, and intimidate the court system. The DPP may not have the guts to excommunicate A Bian. But are civic-minded individuals willing to countenance democracy and justice being trampled under his boot?
Taiwan's political atmosphere is permeated with nihilism. All the public can see is political calculation. Concern for the public interest is nowhere to be found. The Ma administration has been badly embarrassed. Yet it refuses to reshuffle its cabinet. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party's eight years of misconduct is clear for all to see. Yet it seems to think mocking the Ma administration at every opportunity will somehow prove its own virtue. Does the DPP consider the Ma administration's missteps some sort of moral victory? The Ma administration's open-door policy toward the mainland runs the risk of wishful thinking. But at least it is correct in its basic direction. By contrast, the Democratic Progressive Party's categorical rejection of all contact with the mainland merely betrays its congenital atavism. Does the DPP think eight years of suffering under its Closed Door Policy wasn't enough?
In the long run, the Democratic Progressive Party must break with Chen Shui-bian. But even more importantly, it must rethink its original goals. Besides the pursuit of power, what remains of the DPP's democratic beliefs and moral principles? The progressive image the Democratic Progressive Party projected eight years ago no longer exists. The political appeals they made back then no longer move the electorate. The political momentum they commanded back then, has been reduced to anti-China and anti-Blue slogans. If the DPP is unable to offer anything new, if it merely follows the path of least resistance, who will follow in its footsteps?
Now that democracy has come to this, the public on Taiwan should have a deeper understanding of the nature of politics. The democracy peddled on the street is democracy on the cheap. A legislature incapable of solving problems has no greater claim to wisdom than any random passerby. Every four years, the public casts its vote. They have less chance of ending up with a satisfactory government than they have of winning the lottery. Citizens in the modern world must to be able to distinguish between good and evil, and must not allow politicians to lead them around by the nose. They must challenge themselves and transcend themselves. When the nation and society are in crisis, citizens must know where they stand and where they must go. They must reach out to others, and lend them their support.
The world is in chaos. The public on Taiwan has no cause for self-pity. We must awaken from our eight-year long nightmare. We must away the cold sweat. We must offer each other our support. We must not allow ourselves to be drawn into the whirlpool.
台灣必須擺脫自我沉陷的漩渦
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.15 03:11 am
外有國際金融風暴激盪，內有扁家貪腐疑雲纏繞，加上新政府施政難孚民眾期待，使台灣陷入經濟與政治的雙重低迷。但撇開非操之在我的國際因素不談，以台灣人民一向的拚勁和智慧，豈會無法超越此一困境？
台 灣當前的政經情勢，距離人民對三月政黨再輪替的期待甚遠；其中，除了新政府的表現不如人意，其實有更深刻的因素值得我們省思。第一，政治虛無主義氣氛瀰 漫，使朝野陷入無休無止的對立和拉扯；政治無法解決眾人的問題，反而成為人們苦惱的根源。第二，在政治操弄下，社會情緒變得憤世嫉俗，動輒譏誚謾罵，拒絕 理解，也缺乏同理心。結果，冷嘲激盪熱諷，徒然製造更多忿懣。第三，社會中間地帶表現得相當疏離，理性、中道的聲音無法浮現，使得社會互信不易建立，也使 傾斜的價值難以匡正。
觀察目前的政治景象，有點像回到當年民進黨執政前的狀態：朝野僵峙，多數黨缺乏方向感，少數黨採取粗暴的杯葛，看不 到就事論事的理性問政。從毒奶事件的反覆不休、葉金川細故遭到勒頸，到民進黨杯葛所有兩岸政策，乃至陳水扁天天下鄉煽惑群眾挑戰司法，可以說台灣儼然處在 一個自我下沉的漩渦中，無法自拔。試想，扁政府的八年積垢未清，台灣政治如果又墜回過去的覆轍，那麼人民這八年的煎熬豈不是全白過了？
稱 這是個「下沉漩渦」，因為它只會把台灣帶向更令人窒息的境地。對照八年前後的變化，台灣的經濟出路更窄，族群的包容彈性更小，民眾不滿一切的情緒更強烈， 社會共識的凝聚更為不易，政治上解決問題能力也更薄弱。攬鏡自照，別說台灣的民主形象已殘破不堪，人民會滿意國家目前的情景嗎？
更別忘 了，八年前陳水扁當選總統，是靠著「向上提升或向下沉淪」的訴求而受到民眾付託；結果，他不僅未把台灣帶向更開闊的境地，反以個人貪腐失德將台灣拖著與之 俱沉。至今，陳水扁還在利用他濫權取得的情資煽惑群眾，恫嚇司法。就算民進黨無力與扁切割，有主見的公民能眼睜睜看著國家顏面和民主正義，皆被他踩在腳下 嗎？
我們之所以認為台灣「政治虛無主義」氣氛瀰漫，主要就是眼見目前的政治只剩下「權謀」的計算，人民的福祉已被他們拋在腦後。馬政府分 明已窘態畢露，卻為了顏面不肯調整內閣職務；民進黨八年執政之失德失能有目共睹，卻以為對馬政府百般譏諷即能反證自己的才德，這是什麼精神勝利法？再說， 馬政府對於大陸的開放政策，確有一廂情願之虞，但方向至少是正確的。反觀民進黨的一味杯葛，除了「逢中必反」的原始本能，難道覺得台灣還沒吃夠鎖國八年的 苦頭？
從長遠看，民進黨要做的其實不只是和阿扁「切割」而已，而是應重新省思自己從政的初衷，除了追求權力，還剩下多少民主信念和道德理 想？比起八年前，民進黨當年擁有的道德形象，如今已經破產；當年標舉的政治號召，如今已泥足難行；當年澎湃的政治動力，如今只剩反中與反藍的躁動。若不能 拿出新的作為，再走無限抗爭的老路，還能吸引誰追隨？
民主走到這個地步，台灣人民也應該對政治的本質有深一層的認識。沿街叫賣的民主，只 是廉價的民主；不能透過論辯解決問題的國會，不會比菜市場的民意高明；而人民只靠著四年一次的投票，「抽中」理想政府的概率比中樂透彩還低。作為一個現代 公民，不僅要能分辨是非黑白，不被政客牽著鼻子走，還要能自我挑戰、自我超越；在國家社會的危機時刻，每一位公民皆應知道自己的位置和方向在哪裡，甚至伸 出手給別人一點支撐的力量。
環顧全球亂局，台灣其實沒什麼好自艾自憐。重要的是，從八年噩夢醒來，一身冷汗未乾，大家要互相打氣，千萬別再掉進同一個漩渦裡。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 15, 2008
Abroad, the global financial maelstrom rages. At home, suspicions of corruption surround the Chen family. Add to this a new administration unable to meet the public's expectations, and it's no surprise Taiwan's political scene is in chaos, and Taiwan's economy is in the doldrums. But leave international factors beyond our control aside for the moment. The public on Taiwan has always displayed both gumption and smarts. Is it truly incapable of working through these problems?
The political and economic situation on Taiwan is hardly what the public expected from the three month old Ma administration. The new administration's performance is far from satisfactory. But other factors also deserve our attention. One. The political atmosphere is permeated with nihilism. The ruling and opposition parties are caught in a never-ending tug of war. Politics is not only unable to solve peoples' problems. It has itself become the problem. Two. Political manipulation has bred public cynicism. People exchange abuse at the drop of a hat. They refuse to understand. They lack empathy. Cynicism breeds more cynicism, This breeds more intense anger and deeper depression. Three. The middle class feels alienated. Voices of reason and moderation cannot make themselves heard. Mutual trust is difficult to establish, making distorted values difficult to correct.
The current political scene reminds us of when the Democratic Progressive Party was not yet in power. A stalemate prevails between the ruling and opposition parties. The majority party lacks direction. The minority party uses violence and refuses to cooperate. Rational policymaking is nowhere to be found. The contaminated dairy products scandal is milked for all it is worth. DPP thugs go so far as to choke Yeh Chin-chuan by the neck. The DPP's only response to cross-Strait policy is "No!" Every day Chen Shui-bian visits the countryside and goad the mob into challenging the legal system. Taiwan now finds itself in a whirlpool, spiraling downward, unable to extricate itself. The residue of eight years of corruption from the Chen Shui-bian regime remains. If Taiwan reverts to the mistakes of the past, then weren't the past eight years of suffering all for nothing?
This downward spiral can only lead to Taiwan's death by suffocation. Compared to eight years ago, Taiwan has fewer economic options, less tolerance for "ethnic," i.e., cultural group, differences, more public discontent, less social cohesion, and less ability to solve political problems. Look in the mirror. Taiwan's image as a democracy is in tatters. Can the public possibly be content with the state of the nation?
Lest we forget, when Chen Shui-bian was elected president eight years ago, his slogan was "We must sink or swim." Not only did he not lead Taiwan into the light, his political corruption and moral degradation dragged Taiwan down along with him into the darkness. Chen Shui-bian has misused his authority to incite discontent among the masses, and intimidate the court system. The DPP may not have the guts to excommunicate A Bian. But are civic-minded individuals willing to countenance democracy and justice being trampled under his boot?
Taiwan's political atmosphere is permeated with nihilism. All the public can see is political calculation. Concern for the public interest is nowhere to be found. The Ma administration has been badly embarrassed. Yet it refuses to reshuffle its cabinet. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party's eight years of misconduct is clear for all to see. Yet it seems to think mocking the Ma administration at every opportunity will somehow prove its own virtue. Does the DPP consider the Ma administration's missteps some sort of moral victory? The Ma administration's open-door policy toward the mainland runs the risk of wishful thinking. But at least it is correct in its basic direction. By contrast, the Democratic Progressive Party's categorical rejection of all contact with the mainland merely betrays its congenital atavism. Does the DPP think eight years of suffering under its Closed Door Policy wasn't enough?
In the long run, the Democratic Progressive Party must break with Chen Shui-bian. But even more importantly, it must rethink its original goals. Besides the pursuit of power, what remains of the DPP's democratic beliefs and moral principles? The progressive image the Democratic Progressive Party projected eight years ago no longer exists. The political appeals they made back then no longer move the electorate. The political momentum they commanded back then, has been reduced to anti-China and anti-Blue slogans. If the DPP is unable to offer anything new, if it merely follows the path of least resistance, who will follow in its footsteps?
Now that democracy has come to this, the public on Taiwan should have a deeper understanding of the nature of politics. The democracy peddled on the street is democracy on the cheap. A legislature incapable of solving problems has no greater claim to wisdom than any random passerby. Every four years, the public casts its vote. They have less chance of ending up with a satisfactory government than they have of winning the lottery. Citizens in the modern world must to be able to distinguish between good and evil, and must not allow politicians to lead them around by the nose. They must challenge themselves and transcend themselves. When the nation and society are in crisis, citizens must know where they stand and where they must go. They must reach out to others, and lend them their support.
The world is in chaos. The public on Taiwan has no cause for self-pity. We must awaken from our eight-year long nightmare. We must away the cold sweat. We must offer each other our support. We must not allow ourselves to be drawn into the whirlpool.
台灣必須擺脫自我沉陷的漩渦
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.15 03:11 am
外有國際金融風暴激盪，內有扁家貪腐疑雲纏繞，加上新政府施政難孚民眾期待，使台灣陷入經濟與政治的雙重低迷。但撇開非操之在我的國際因素不談，以台灣人民一向的拚勁和智慧，豈會無法超越此一困境？
台 灣當前的政經情勢，距離人民對三月政黨再輪替的期待甚遠；其中，除了新政府的表現不如人意，其實有更深刻的因素值得我們省思。第一，政治虛無主義氣氛瀰 漫，使朝野陷入無休無止的對立和拉扯；政治無法解決眾人的問題，反而成為人們苦惱的根源。第二，在政治操弄下，社會情緒變得憤世嫉俗，動輒譏誚謾罵，拒絕 理解，也缺乏同理心。結果，冷嘲激盪熱諷，徒然製造更多忿懣。第三，社會中間地帶表現得相當疏離，理性、中道的聲音無法浮現，使得社會互信不易建立，也使 傾斜的價值難以匡正。
觀察目前的政治景象，有點像回到當年民進黨執政前的狀態：朝野僵峙，多數黨缺乏方向感，少數黨採取粗暴的杯葛，看不 到就事論事的理性問政。從毒奶事件的反覆不休、葉金川細故遭到勒頸，到民進黨杯葛所有兩岸政策，乃至陳水扁天天下鄉煽惑群眾挑戰司法，可以說台灣儼然處在 一個自我下沉的漩渦中，無法自拔。試想，扁政府的八年積垢未清，台灣政治如果又墜回過去的覆轍，那麼人民這八年的煎熬豈不是全白過了？
稱 這是個「下沉漩渦」，因為它只會把台灣帶向更令人窒息的境地。對照八年前後的變化，台灣的經濟出路更窄，族群的包容彈性更小，民眾不滿一切的情緒更強烈， 社會共識的凝聚更為不易，政治上解決問題能力也更薄弱。攬鏡自照，別說台灣的民主形象已殘破不堪，人民會滿意國家目前的情景嗎？
更別忘 了，八年前陳水扁當選總統，是靠著「向上提升或向下沉淪」的訴求而受到民眾付託；結果，他不僅未把台灣帶向更開闊的境地，反以個人貪腐失德將台灣拖著與之 俱沉。至今，陳水扁還在利用他濫權取得的情資煽惑群眾，恫嚇司法。就算民進黨無力與扁切割，有主見的公民能眼睜睜看著國家顏面和民主正義，皆被他踩在腳下 嗎？
我們之所以認為台灣「政治虛無主義」氣氛瀰漫，主要就是眼見目前的政治只剩下「權謀」的計算，人民的福祉已被他們拋在腦後。馬政府分 明已窘態畢露，卻為了顏面不肯調整內閣職務；民進黨八年執政之失德失能有目共睹，卻以為對馬政府百般譏諷即能反證自己的才德，這是什麼精神勝利法？再說， 馬政府對於大陸的開放政策，確有一廂情願之虞，但方向至少是正確的。反觀民進黨的一味杯葛，除了「逢中必反」的原始本能，難道覺得台灣還沒吃夠鎖國八年的 苦頭？
從長遠看，民進黨要做的其實不只是和阿扁「切割」而已，而是應重新省思自己從政的初衷，除了追求權力，還剩下多少民主信念和道德理 想？比起八年前，民進黨當年擁有的道德形象，如今已經破產；當年標舉的政治號召，如今已泥足難行；當年澎湃的政治動力，如今只剩反中與反藍的躁動。若不能 拿出新的作為，再走無限抗爭的老路，還能吸引誰追隨？
民主走到這個地步，台灣人民也應該對政治的本質有深一層的認識。沿街叫賣的民主，只 是廉價的民主；不能透過論辯解決問題的國會，不會比菜市場的民意高明；而人民只靠著四年一次的投票，「抽中」理想政府的概率比中樂透彩還低。作為一個現代 公民，不僅要能分辨是非黑白，不被政客牽著鼻子走，還要能自我挑戰、自我超越；在國家社會的危機時刻，每一位公民皆應知道自己的位置和方向在哪裡，甚至伸 出手給別人一點支撐的力量。
環顧全球亂局，台灣其實沒什麼好自艾自憐。重要的是，從八年噩夢醒來，一身冷汗未乾，大家要互相打氣，千萬別再掉進同一個漩渦裡。
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Chen Shui-bian Hijacks the Democratic Progressive Party's Protest March
Chen Shui-bian Hijacks the Democratic Progressive Party's Protest March
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 14, 2008
We have been warning the Democratic Progressive Party that Chen Shui-bian intends to use Chen Yunlin's visit as a pretext for a showdown with the party. It now appears Chen Shui-bian intends to resort to the most underhanded means imaginable.
Chen Shui-bian intends to hijack the DPP's protest march, set the agenda, make demands, seize control, and hog the media spotlight. Some people originally thought Chen Shui-bian might pull his punches, that he might organize his own event at another venu, that he might challenge the DPP's leadership, head to head. But circumstances have changed. Chen Shui-bian now intends to march right up to the DPP's procession, cut in line, and turn the DPP's event into his own.
Huang Ching-ling, DPP Chairman for Taipei City, said he intended to invite Chen Shui-bian to the event, including the candlelight vigil and the protest march on Ketagelan Road. Huang Ching-ling offered the following reasons. One. A Bian has yet to be indicted or tried. As Huang put it, "Just exactly what crime has Chen Shui-bian committed?" Two. Everyone has a right to "Oppose China, and Defend Taiwan." Whether one "Supports A Bian," Huang said, must not be confused with "Opposition to China." Chen Shui-bian must not deprived of the right to participate in an "anti-China protest." Three. Besides, Chen Shui-bian is "Taiwan's staunchest champion!"
Huang Ching-ling's argument sounds reasonable. What excuse do the DPP and the event sponsors have to prohibit Chen Shui-bian from participating in anti-China activities? Last Friday the DPP's Committee for Clean Government resolved that "If Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party." This inadvertently strengthens Huang Ching-ling's argument: "Just exactly what crime has Chen Shui-bian committed?" The DPP's hesitation every step of the way created a situation in which Chen Shui-bian, having been given an inch, was able to take a mile.
During the August 30 protest march, Chen Shui-bian's time had not yet come. All he could say was "My heart is with you." Now however, Chen Shui-bian has increased his political leverage. Now he intends to publicly propose that "The DPP may not deprive any Taiwanese of the right to oppose China." Needless to say, "any Taiwanese" would include Chen Shui-bian. In other words, no one may prevent Chen Shui-bian from participating in DPP activities. Chen Shui-bian intends to publicly march right up to the DPP procession and cut in line. Does the Democratic Progressive Party dare to publicly drive him away? When the time comes, Chen Shui-bian may be surrounded by a well-prepared "Pro Chen Battalion," thousands strong. They will insinuate themselves into the march formation. They will carry their own own signs, shout their own slogans, and wave their own banners. Chen Shui-bian will of course be their heaviest artillery. All eyes and ears will be on Chen Shui-bian. What will the DPP be protesting? Why will the DPP be marching? It will look as if it is protesting and marching on behalf of Chen Shui-bian.
We can predict with certainty that the protest march will be a major victory for Chen Shui-bian. For Tsai Ing-wen and the Democratic Progressive Party's Central Committee on the other hand, the protest march will amount to a painful coup d'etat. Chen Shui-bian has crossed the Rubicon. He has ordered his troops to squat on the DPP's doorstep. They are marching through the front door. The DPP Central Committee is in full retreat. Chen Shui-bian has made true his boast to usurp the party leadership. "If the Democratic Progressive Party has no leader, I am willing to return and be its leader!"
Financial turmoil is increasing the world over. Society is torn with unrest. People are depressed and fearful. For the Democratic Progressive Party to launch large-scale demonstrations at a time like this, is a politically dubious move. If they are merely helping people let off a little steam that would be understandable. But to blow matters out of proportion, beyond what the public actually experiences, risks losing sight of the big picture and shooting onself in the foot. If the protest degenerates into an internecine struggle between Chen Shui-bian and the DPP, or a coup d'etat within the DPP, the event will alienate a majority of the electorate on Taiwan.
During the August 30 protest march the DPP Central Committee was barely able to keep Chen down. Now however, it is impossible to keep Chen Shui-bian from joining the protest march. The protest march might not become a "Support A Bian Party." But it may well turn into a conflagration, into the biggest event on Chen Shui-bian's behalf since the money-laundering case exploded.
The Democratic Progressive Party Central Committee is caught on the horns of a dilemma, between the "Two Chens." One might say that Chen Shui-bian forced the Democratic Progressive Party to hold this protest march in the first place, and now he is reaping the benefits of this event. The Democratic Progressive Party must deal with Chen Shui-bian's provocations. Now that it has been forced to deal with Chen Shui-bian, it has no time to deal with Chen Yunlin.
Chen Yunlin has become the pretext Chen Shui-bian needed to pick a fight with the DPP. Protests against Chen Yunlin will turn into virtual protests. Internecine struggles within the Democratic Progressive Party and the Green Camp, on the other hand, will be real struggles. For Chen Shui-bian, it's a case of "heads I win, tails you lose." The Democratic Progressive Party will be seriously damaged. The Democratic Progressive Party is riding a tiger. All it can do is hang on.
喧賓奪主：陳水扁參加民進黨大遊行
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.14 02:38 am
我們一直提醒民進黨，陳水扁將利用陳雲林來訪，作為與黨攤牌的舞台。如今，陳水扁似乎將使出在想像範圍中最狠毒的一計。
屆時，陳水扁將直接走進民進黨的遊行隊伍中，操控議題及訴求，喧賓奪主，搶佔視聽的焦點。原本在想像中，陳水扁也許會略留餘地，可能另外聚集群眾，另搭舞台，與民進黨「拚場」。但是，現在不同了，陳水扁將直接加入民進黨的隊伍中，把民進黨的舞台變成他自己的舞台。
台 北市黨部主委黃慶林宣稱，他將邀請陳水扁參加抗議陳雲林的活動，包括凱道守夜及大遊行。黃慶林所持的理由是：一、扁案至今並未起訴及判刑，「阿扁到底犯了 什麼罪」？二、人人皆有「反對中國／守護台灣」的權利，「挺扁」與否，與「反中」不可混為一談，不能剝奪陳水扁參與「反中抗議」的權利；三、何況，陳水扁 「最會守護台灣」！
黃慶林的說法看似入情入理，民進黨及主辦社團有什麼理由拒絕陳水扁參加反中活動？上周五民進黨廉政會對扁案議決「一審有罪再說」，這使得黃慶林等所持「阿扁到底犯了什麼罪」的說法，更顯得理直氣壯。民進黨每一步猶豫退讓，皆造成陳水扁「得寸進里」的後果。
八 三○大遊行時，陳水扁的氣候未成，他只能說「心與大家在一起」；現在，陳水扁的政治槓桿已經製成並啟動，他將公開主張「民進黨不能剝奪任何台灣人反中護台 的權利」，當然包括他陳水扁在內；也就是說，任何人皆不可剝奪他陳水扁參加的權利。陳水扁「公然」走進遊行隊伍中，民進黨難道敢「公然」驅趕他？屆時，陳 水扁可能在精心組編的「挺扁大隊」數千人簇擁之下，自成編隊嵌入大遊行的長龍之中；有自己的標語，自己的口號，自己的旗幟，當然陳水扁自己更是最夯的放送 筒；屆時，所有的視聽皆以陳水扁為焦點。民進黨為何抗議？為何遊行？將形同一切皆為了陳水扁。
未卜可知，這將是陳水扁的大勝利；但對民進黨蔡英文的黨中央而言，卻不啻是一場慘烈的「政變」。陳水扁班師回黨，侵門踏戶；黨中央招架不住，節節敗退。這個景象，儼然已如陳水扁喧賓奪主的豪語：「民進黨若無人領導，我願回來領導！」
其 實，世界金融風暴方興未艾，社會杌隉不安，人心惶恐鬱悶；民進黨此時發動大規模的抗議示威，就政治得失而言，本即不易拿捏。倘若只是適當抒發民氣，或許不 妨；但若演出激烈，甚至「如影隨形」，超逾了民憤的比例，那就極易形成「嘜擱亂啦」的反效果。何況，倘若這一場抗議活動，最後竟然演成陳水扁與民進黨的一 場借題發揮的政治內鬥，或進而演成了民進黨內部的一場「政變」；則就社會效應言，恐怕就會弄巧成拙，將使主流社會倒盡胃口。
八三○遊行，黨中央好不容易壓住了「挺扁」的聲音；但是，如今卻不可能阻禁陳水扁親身加入抗議陳雲林的遊行隊伍。於是，這場抗議，即使不是「挺扁大會」，但也恐將成為陳水扁洗錢案爆發以來最盛大的一場「取暖大會」與「放火大會」。
民進黨中央已陷於十分嚴峻的「兩陳難題」之中。可以這麼說，民進黨是被陳水扁逼得舉辦這場遊行，但如今這場遊行卻將被陳水扁收割。現在，民進黨面對陳水扁的攪局，其實已顧不了對待陳雲林的章法了！
這場「抗議活動」，陳雲林已成陳水扁及民進黨內鬥的藉口與舞台。屆時，抗議陳雲林是虛，民進黨及綠營內鬥是實。陳水扁穩賺不賠，民進黨則恐將內傷嚴重。民進黨已勢成騎虎，只能剉咧等！
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 14, 2008
We have been warning the Democratic Progressive Party that Chen Shui-bian intends to use Chen Yunlin's visit as a pretext for a showdown with the party. It now appears Chen Shui-bian intends to resort to the most underhanded means imaginable.
Chen Shui-bian intends to hijack the DPP's protest march, set the agenda, make demands, seize control, and hog the media spotlight. Some people originally thought Chen Shui-bian might pull his punches, that he might organize his own event at another venu, that he might challenge the DPP's leadership, head to head. But circumstances have changed. Chen Shui-bian now intends to march right up to the DPP's procession, cut in line, and turn the DPP's event into his own.
Huang Ching-ling, DPP Chairman for Taipei City, said he intended to invite Chen Shui-bian to the event, including the candlelight vigil and the protest march on Ketagelan Road. Huang Ching-ling offered the following reasons. One. A Bian has yet to be indicted or tried. As Huang put it, "Just exactly what crime has Chen Shui-bian committed?" Two. Everyone has a right to "Oppose China, and Defend Taiwan." Whether one "Supports A Bian," Huang said, must not be confused with "Opposition to China." Chen Shui-bian must not deprived of the right to participate in an "anti-China protest." Three. Besides, Chen Shui-bian is "Taiwan's staunchest champion!"
Huang Ching-ling's argument sounds reasonable. What excuse do the DPP and the event sponsors have to prohibit Chen Shui-bian from participating in anti-China activities? Last Friday the DPP's Committee for Clean Government resolved that "If Chen Shui-bian is found guilty in the first instance, he will be expelled from the party." This inadvertently strengthens Huang Ching-ling's argument: "Just exactly what crime has Chen Shui-bian committed?" The DPP's hesitation every step of the way created a situation in which Chen Shui-bian, having been given an inch, was able to take a mile.
During the August 30 protest march, Chen Shui-bian's time had not yet come. All he could say was "My heart is with you." Now however, Chen Shui-bian has increased his political leverage. Now he intends to publicly propose that "The DPP may not deprive any Taiwanese of the right to oppose China." Needless to say, "any Taiwanese" would include Chen Shui-bian. In other words, no one may prevent Chen Shui-bian from participating in DPP activities. Chen Shui-bian intends to publicly march right up to the DPP procession and cut in line. Does the Democratic Progressive Party dare to publicly drive him away? When the time comes, Chen Shui-bian may be surrounded by a well-prepared "Pro Chen Battalion," thousands strong. They will insinuate themselves into the march formation. They will carry their own own signs, shout their own slogans, and wave their own banners. Chen Shui-bian will of course be their heaviest artillery. All eyes and ears will be on Chen Shui-bian. What will the DPP be protesting? Why will the DPP be marching? It will look as if it is protesting and marching on behalf of Chen Shui-bian.
We can predict with certainty that the protest march will be a major victory for Chen Shui-bian. For Tsai Ing-wen and the Democratic Progressive Party's Central Committee on the other hand, the protest march will amount to a painful coup d'etat. Chen Shui-bian has crossed the Rubicon. He has ordered his troops to squat on the DPP's doorstep. They are marching through the front door. The DPP Central Committee is in full retreat. Chen Shui-bian has made true his boast to usurp the party leadership. "If the Democratic Progressive Party has no leader, I am willing to return and be its leader!"
Financial turmoil is increasing the world over. Society is torn with unrest. People are depressed and fearful. For the Democratic Progressive Party to launch large-scale demonstrations at a time like this, is a politically dubious move. If they are merely helping people let off a little steam that would be understandable. But to blow matters out of proportion, beyond what the public actually experiences, risks losing sight of the big picture and shooting onself in the foot. If the protest degenerates into an internecine struggle between Chen Shui-bian and the DPP, or a coup d'etat within the DPP, the event will alienate a majority of the electorate on Taiwan.
During the August 30 protest march the DPP Central Committee was barely able to keep Chen down. Now however, it is impossible to keep Chen Shui-bian from joining the protest march. The protest march might not become a "Support A Bian Party." But it may well turn into a conflagration, into the biggest event on Chen Shui-bian's behalf since the money-laundering case exploded.
The Democratic Progressive Party Central Committee is caught on the horns of a dilemma, between the "Two Chens." One might say that Chen Shui-bian forced the Democratic Progressive Party to hold this protest march in the first place, and now he is reaping the benefits of this event. The Democratic Progressive Party must deal with Chen Shui-bian's provocations. Now that it has been forced to deal with Chen Shui-bian, it has no time to deal with Chen Yunlin.
Chen Yunlin has become the pretext Chen Shui-bian needed to pick a fight with the DPP. Protests against Chen Yunlin will turn into virtual protests. Internecine struggles within the Democratic Progressive Party and the Green Camp, on the other hand, will be real struggles. For Chen Shui-bian, it's a case of "heads I win, tails you lose." The Democratic Progressive Party will be seriously damaged. The Democratic Progressive Party is riding a tiger. All it can do is hang on.
喧賓奪主：陳水扁參加民進黨大遊行
【聯合報╱社論】
2008.10.14 02:38 am
我們一直提醒民進黨，陳水扁將利用陳雲林來訪，作為與黨攤牌的舞台。如今，陳水扁似乎將使出在想像範圍中最狠毒的一計。
屆時，陳水扁將直接走進民進黨的遊行隊伍中，操控議題及訴求，喧賓奪主，搶佔視聽的焦點。原本在想像中，陳水扁也許會略留餘地，可能另外聚集群眾，另搭舞台，與民進黨「拚場」。但是，現在不同了，陳水扁將直接加入民進黨的隊伍中，把民進黨的舞台變成他自己的舞台。
台 北市黨部主委黃慶林宣稱，他將邀請陳水扁參加抗議陳雲林的活動，包括凱道守夜及大遊行。黃慶林所持的理由是：一、扁案至今並未起訴及判刑，「阿扁到底犯了 什麼罪」？二、人人皆有「反對中國／守護台灣」的權利，「挺扁」與否，與「反中」不可混為一談，不能剝奪陳水扁參與「反中抗議」的權利；三、何況，陳水扁 「最會守護台灣」！
黃慶林的說法看似入情入理，民進黨及主辦社團有什麼理由拒絕陳水扁參加反中活動？上周五民進黨廉政會對扁案議決「一審有罪再說」，這使得黃慶林等所持「阿扁到底犯了什麼罪」的說法，更顯得理直氣壯。民進黨每一步猶豫退讓，皆造成陳水扁「得寸進里」的後果。
八 三○大遊行時，陳水扁的氣候未成，他只能說「心與大家在一起」；現在，陳水扁的政治槓桿已經製成並啟動，他將公開主張「民進黨不能剝奪任何台灣人反中護台 的權利」，當然包括他陳水扁在內；也就是說，任何人皆不可剝奪他陳水扁參加的權利。陳水扁「公然」走進遊行隊伍中，民進黨難道敢「公然」驅趕他？屆時，陳 水扁可能在精心組編的「挺扁大隊」數千人簇擁之下，自成編隊嵌入大遊行的長龍之中；有自己的標語，自己的口號，自己的旗幟，當然陳水扁自己更是最夯的放送 筒；屆時，所有的視聽皆以陳水扁為焦點。民進黨為何抗議？為何遊行？將形同一切皆為了陳水扁。
未卜可知，這將是陳水扁的大勝利；但對民進黨蔡英文的黨中央而言，卻不啻是一場慘烈的「政變」。陳水扁班師回黨，侵門踏戶；黨中央招架不住，節節敗退。這個景象，儼然已如陳水扁喧賓奪主的豪語：「民進黨若無人領導，我願回來領導！」
其 實，世界金融風暴方興未艾，社會杌隉不安，人心惶恐鬱悶；民進黨此時發動大規模的抗議示威，就政治得失而言，本即不易拿捏。倘若只是適當抒發民氣，或許不 妨；但若演出激烈，甚至「如影隨形」，超逾了民憤的比例，那就極易形成「嘜擱亂啦」的反效果。何況，倘若這一場抗議活動，最後竟然演成陳水扁與民進黨的一 場借題發揮的政治內鬥，或進而演成了民進黨內部的一場「政變」；則就社會效應言，恐怕就會弄巧成拙，將使主流社會倒盡胃口。
八三○遊行，黨中央好不容易壓住了「挺扁」的聲音；但是，如今卻不可能阻禁陳水扁親身加入抗議陳雲林的遊行隊伍。於是，這場抗議，即使不是「挺扁大會」，但也恐將成為陳水扁洗錢案爆發以來最盛大的一場「取暖大會」與「放火大會」。
民進黨中央已陷於十分嚴峻的「兩陳難題」之中。可以這麼說，民進黨是被陳水扁逼得舉辦這場遊行，但如今這場遊行卻將被陳水扁收割。現在，民進黨面對陳水扁的攪局，其實已顧不了對待陳雲林的章法了！
這場「抗議活動」，陳雲林已成陳水扁及民進黨內鬥的藉口與舞台。屆時，抗議陳雲林是虛，民進黨及綠營內鬥是實。陳水扁穩賺不賠，民進黨則恐將內傷嚴重。民進黨已勢成騎虎，只能剉咧等！
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)