KMT and DPP Must Get Back to TIFA
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 7, 2012
Summary: The DPP has agreed to allow the importation of U.S. beef in accordance with international standards. The sole remaining obstacle to Taipei and Washington signing TIFA has been eliminated. This is the beginning of KMT and DPP consensus on TIFA. The Republic of China is under threat, both from within and without. The KMT and DPP must work together to defend the Republic of China and to save the nation. They can begin with TIFA.
Full Text below:
The DPP has agreed to allow the importation of U.S. beef in accordance with international standards. The sole remaining obstacle to Taipei and Washington signing TIFA has been eliminated. This is the beginning of KMT and DPP consensus on TIFA. Its significance is twofold.
One. TIFA (Taiwan-US Trade Investment Framework Agreement) may be the only major national policy proposal that the DPP is not determined to block to the bitter end. When ECFA was signed the DPP denounced it as "pandering to [Mainland] China and selling out Taiwan." It blocked it to the bitter end. But meetings over TIFA began during the Chen Shui-bian era. The DPP is not about to object to improved Taipei-Washington relations. It has no reason to object.
Two. If TIFA is signed, economic and trade relations between Taipei and Washington will improve. More importantly, so will political relations. If TIFA goes smoothly, Taipei will find it easier to sign other FTAs. Looking further ahead, TIFA may pave the way for Taipei to participate in the TPP (Pan-Pacific Partnership). It may enable Taiwan to become a Free Trade Island. Therefore, TIFA is not merely a step that will improve relations between Taipei and Washington. It is an important first step for Taipei's global strategy.
In other words, if Taipei's goal is to make Taiwan a "Free Trade Island" then it must proceed from ECFA to TIFA to other FTAs to the Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone to TPP to a Free Trade Island. This is the step by step path it must take. This path has three meanings for Taiwan.
One. Taiwan has lost its way. TIFA will restore long-lost hope. The public will finally have a long range goal. A Free Trade Island will offer the public a vision everyone can work toward. It will show the way to achieve this goal. TIFA is the key.
Two. This goal and this path can change Taiwan. Taiwan has long been the victim of internal political bickering. TIFA can give Taiwan an economic perspective and an economic goal. It can offer a clear path. TIFA is the key.
Three. Joining the TPP wiil enable Taiwan to become a Free Trade Island. It will resolve Taiwan's economic and trade problems. It will show the way we must take. More importantly, it is the only way Taiwan can avoid marginalization on the international stage. The inevitable consequence of trade and economic marginalization is political marginalization. Taipei must use TPP and Taiwan's status as a Free Trade Island to become part of the international trade system. This will integrate it into the international security system. TIFA is the key.
In sum, we hope that the KMT and DPP will promptly end months of internal bickering. The signing of TIFA can be the basis for cooperation. Let us go from ECFA to TIFA to other FTAs to the Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone to TPP to a Free Trade Island. Let this path be the basis by which political parties compete. Let the parties forgo the vicious infighting that results in wheel-spinning. Competition between political parties will of course continue to compete. But one must know for what and for whom one is fighting for. We are fighting for Taiwan. We want it to become a Free Trade Island.
The Democratic Progressive Party is in coopetition with the KMT. It can play an important role. One. The DPP must not oppose TIFA. But it can safeguard Taiwan's interests during negotiations. Two. TIFA's political and economic basis is the same as the political and economic basis for ECFA, other FTAs, the Kaohsiung Free Trade Zone, TPP, and a Free Trade Island. Since the DPP supports TIFA, it must not oppose this underlying political and economic basis. Three. Cross-Strait goodwill and mutual trust is an important basis for this system. Therefore the DPP must confront this system. It must rethink its cross-strait policy.
Finally, we solemly suggest that such a path may be the only political and economic way out. It is a difficult path, one fraught with risk. Becoming a Free Trade Island requires, in Vincent Siew's words, liberalizing the economic environment while upgrading the industrial structure. This is no easy task. But if the economic environment is not liberalized, we cannot become competitive. Our industrial structure will not be of high enough quality. It will not be able to withstand the competition. Therefore, the KMT and the DPP must confront this situation. They must reach a consensus. One. This path requires bipartisanship. Two. The two parties must reach a bipartisan consensus on cross-Strait policy. .
The Republic of China is under threat, both from within and without. The KMT and DPP must work together to defend the Republic of China and to save the nation. They can begin with TIFA.
國民兩黨速速回到TIFA
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.07
民進黨宣布將依「國際標準」開放美牛，台美議簽TIFA的唯一障礙已然解除，此際正是國、民兩黨共同面對TIFA的開端，其主要意義有二：
一、TIFA（台美貿易投資架構協定）可能是民進黨唯一不至於全盤否定與全盤杯葛的國家重大政策。不像ECFA議簽之時，民進黨斥為「傾中賣台」，全力反對；而TIFA則始議自扁政府時代，民進黨不至於反對改善台美關係，無反對的理由。
二、如果簽成TIFA，非但可使台美經貿關係升級，亦將使台美的政治關係更趨改善。且TIFA若進行順利，對於台灣議簽其他「類FTA」（類自由貿易協定）亦有指標作用；再向前推，則是為台灣參加TPP（泛太平洋夥伴關係）預作鋪墊，並指向將台灣建設為「自由經貿島」。因此，TIFA不只是改善台美關係的一個動作，更可視為台灣全球佈局的一個重要起步。
也就是說，台灣若以「自由經貿島」為目標，則ECFA↓TIFA↓類FTA↓高雄自由經濟示範區↓TPP↓自由經貿島，即是必須一步一腳印地走下去的路徑圖。而此一路徑圖，對台灣又有三大意義：
一、這將使得久已失去憧憬、迷失了方向的台灣，終於找到了一個終極的「目標」或「志向」，即「自由經貿島」；亦即找到了一個全民可以共同努力的前景，並畫出了通向此前景的路徑，而TIFA正是關鍵性的一步。
二、此一目標及路徑，將可改變台灣一向糾纏於政治內耗之中，並以政治來綑綁自己的困局；轉而改以經濟的觀點來標定台灣的目標，並指出明確的路徑，而TIFA則是關鍵性的一步。
三、參加TPP、將台灣建設為自由經貿島，不但是解決台灣經貿難題的必趨及應趨之路，更是若欲使台灣在國際政治上不致流於邊緣化的唯一方案。因為，經貿邊緣化，帶來的後果必定就是政治邊緣化；而台灣如果能以TPP、自由經貿島融入國際經貿體系，也就是形同相當程度的融入了國際安全體系，而TIFA更是關鍵性的一步。
綜上所論，我們寄望國、民兩黨速速收拾起幾個月來內耗空轉的亂局，何妨就以TIFA的議簽做為攜手努力的第一個合作題材，共同將台灣引上ECFA↓TIFA↓類FTA↓高雄自由經濟示範區↓TPP↓自由經貿島的路徑之上；今後即以此一路徑，作為政黨競合關係的準據，勿再陷於歪纏惡鬥的內耗空轉之中。如此，政黨之間當然仍有競爭，唯也會知道為何而戰，為誰而戰，即是為台灣走向「自由經貿島」的路徑而戰。
民進黨在此一競合關係中，尤可擔負重要角色。因為：一、民進黨不可能反對TIFA，且反而可以在議簽過程中扮演守護台灣利益的監督者。二、TIFA所代表的政經思維，其實就是ECFA、類FTA、高雄自由經濟示範區、TPP，及自由經貿島等一致且一貫的政經思維；民進黨若支持TIFA，即不可能反對這整個的政經思維體系。三、兩岸的善意及互信，是此一體系的重要基礎，因此，民進黨面對此一體系，就不能不調整其兩岸政策。
最後，我們必須十分嚴肅地說，這一個路徑圖可能是台灣唯一的政經出路，但這條路徑卻十分艱難且充滿風險。在邁向自由經貿島的過程中，如何兼顧「經濟環境自由化／產業結構優質化」（蕭萬長語），絕非易事。經濟環境不自由化，就無法建立競爭力；產業結構不優質化，就禁不起競爭。因此，國民兩黨面對此一情勢，最基本的共同態度應是：一、在此一路徑圖上，必須有「兩黨一致」（bipartisanship）的共識；二、首先，必須建立兩岸政策的「兩黨一致」。
內憂外患，台灣危矣。希望國民兩黨同心協力保台救國，就從一起速速回到TIFA做起！
Monday, July 9, 2012
Thursday, July 5, 2012
President Ma's Declarations are Not Enough
President Ma's Declarations are Not Enough
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 6, 2012
Summary: The Lin Yi-shi corruption case has dealt a major blow to President Ma's reputation. Public approval has plummeted to a new low of 15%. The Special Investigation Unit took immediate action and worked on the case for several days straight. But if the Ma administration wants to reverse the decline, it must take more convincing action. Only then can it re-unite the people, and restore national morale.
Full Text below:
The Lin Yi-shi corruption case has dealt a major blow to President Ma's reputation. Public approval has plummeted to a new low of 15%. The Special Investigation Unit took immediate action and worked on the case for several days straight. But if the Ma administration wants to reverse the decline, it must take more convincing action. Only then can it re-unite the people, and restore national morale.
Lin Yi-shi abused his power as Secretary-General of the Executive Yuan to engage in corruption. He was immediately taken into custody. Clearly, the justice system has greater independence than before. But Ma Ying-jeou promoted Lin Yi-shi repeatedly. He contributed to LIn's unbridled arrogance. He is going to have a hard time avoiding ridicule for being a poor judge of character who was easily deceived. Turning everything over to the justice system will not make this go away. Superficially the matter pertains to Lin Yi-shi alone. But the Ma administration has stumbled repeatedly. The Lin corruption scandal has further undermined the Ma administration's prestige and popularity. This is what the ruling administration should concentrate on during this crisis.
President Ma has attempted to cope with the crisis, internally and externally, for several days. But the public senses little determination to turn the tide. One. When Ma first learned that a news magazine had blown the scandal wide open, he asked Lin Yi-shi to hold a press conference and explain himself. Nothing more. This made Ma look gullible and passive. Two. Ma subsequently issued a series of public apologies. But none came across as sincere, including his admonition that administration personnel should "learn a lesson from this." Ma's spin was disingenuous. It implied that he had nothing to do with it. Three. Ma's responses to any criticisms of his administration have never been convincing, Reciting "clean government" slogans merely reveals the impotence behind his good intentions.
Now in particular, dangers await. The affairs of state are overwhelming. Yet President Ma persists in his pro forma itinerary, giving speechs everywhere. He even presented certificates to comrades in the Central Standing Committee. He failed to allocate time to matters of state, or strengthen his resolve on national policy. Instead he shuttled back and forth, squandering valuable time on trivialities. Can this restore lost confidence in President Ma?
This does not mean a president must never participate in civic activities. It merely means he must reorder his priorities and make intelligent choices. If the nation's political and economic goals still need sorting out, yet leaders devote their time and energy to pro forma political speeches, how can they possibly rally the people to action?
Why was a corrupt martinet like Lin Yi-shi seen as a political golden boy? Beginning with Ma's first term. critics have repeatedly urged Ma to widen the circles from which he draws his staff and policy makers. They have urged him to listen more to suggestions from his presidential advisors, national policy advisors, and community leaders. President Ma loves giving talks before small groups. This has never changed. President Ma, when was the last time you heard this admonition? Do you remember who it was who gave you this advice?
President Ma is an honest man. He has integrity. Of this we need have no doubt. But honesty and integrity are personal virtues. To be a national leader in the public sector requires more. That is the gap that President Ma must fill. This involves three keys. One. The desire to lead must be transformed into concrete action. One cannot simply make ringing declarations and leave it at that. Ma Ying-jeou's political training has led to an over-reliance on political declarations, accompanied by a lack of actual follow-through. He must not muddle through a second four-year term. Otherwise he will accomplish nothing. Two. Ma must have a sense of urgency. Taiwan has been immoblized by internal bickering for years. Stronger leadership is required to lead the country out of its morass. President Ma must pick up the pace. He must break the deadlock. Otherwise, society will remain paralyzed by feelings of impotence, and the national nightmare will never end. Three. Ma must be willing to share power and delegate authority. A nation's development must not depend upon a single head of state. He must transcend partisanship and make the best use of human talent. If Ma continues to rely on his tiny circle of decision-makers things are unlikely to take a turn for the better.
President Ma is too much of a conformist. This cannot be denied. It has hampered his efforts at reform. It has made it hard to implement groundbreaking policies. Even more regrettable are Lin Yi-shi's corruption scandals. These have undermined the Ma administration's image. They have shown President Ma to be a poor judge of character. This is a crisis of governance, both for Ma's party and for the Ma administration. If the Ma administration merely parrots its anti-corruption declaration, or passively waits for the Special Investigation Unit to announce its findings, it cannot mollify public anger and disappointment. The Lin corruption scandal was a slap in Ma's face. President Ma must act to restore his reputation. Otherwise he can forget about any historical legacy.
馬總統的宣示不足回應社會期待
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.06
受林益世貪瀆案影響，馬總統原已捉襟見肘的聲望再受重挫，民意支持度已降至一成五之新低。儘管特偵組偵辦行動連日皆有斬獲，但馬政府若要扭轉頹勢，勢必拿出更具說服力的實際行動，才能重新凝聚民心、振作國家士氣。
林益世以行政院祕書長之高位涉貪，旋即遭到羈押，顯示司法之獨立性已日漸建立。但從政治面看，馬英九過去對林益世的不次拔擢，助長其驕恣氣焰，實難脫「識人不明」及「易受欺矇」之譏，這恐非一句「一切交給司法」即可交代。亦即，此案表面上是林益世個人操守問題，但在馬政府施政連連失利之際，這對執政團隊的領導威望及人民望治心切之情都是雪上加霜，這才應是主政者面對此一危機的著眼點。
然而，從馬總統連日對內對外的因應，人們卻看不到他展現雄心、力挽狂瀾的方法。第一，他最初得悉雜誌將爆料弊案，僅要求林益世開記者會說明，顯得輕信而被動。第二，他其後連續公開道歉都顯得誠意不足，包括要求執政團隊「記取教訓」，語意失準，彷彿自己還可以置身事外。第三，他回應外界質疑始終缺乏力量，反覆宣示幾句「清廉執政」口號，至少暴露其心餘力絀。
尤其，在此危機四伏、國事如麻之際，馬總統照舊每天進行一些非關緊要的儀式性參訪行程，到處致詞演說，包括頒發中常委證書給從政同志。不把寶貴的時間用來思考國是，為治國大政沉澱心志，卻穿梭在細瑣的行程中虛耗時光，馬總統如何挽回他失去的民心？
這並不是說總統不該參加民間活動，而是必須權衡輕重緩急而有所選擇。如果國家政經大計正待全力衝刺整合，而領導人卻把時間和心思花在一些行禮如儀的事務上，每天發表一些無足輕重的演說，如何號召全民行動？
為什麼一個貪瀆跋扈的林益世，竟被當成政治金童重用？從上屆任期開始，輿論要求他擴大選才圈及決策圈的建言即不曾間斷，包括應多聽取資政、國策顧問乃至社會賢能之士的建言，但馬總統樂在小場合演說的習慣始終未改。請問馬總統：你上一次聽到諫言是什麼時候的事？你又記得誰的什麼忠告？
馬總統是個廉潔、正直的人，這點毋需懷疑。但無論如何，廉潔正直只是個人修養的範疇，這和在公領域成為一個好的國家領導人還有很大的距離，那正是馬總統必須設法填補的差距。其中有三個重要關鍵：一，是要將領導的心志具體化為「行動」，不能停格在「宣示」的層次。馬英九的從政訓練導致他過度倚賴宣示，行動力和執行力相對不足；這點，在第二個四年任期不能再含糊以對，否則將一事無成。二，要有時間的迫切感。台灣陷於內耗多年，必須要強而有魄力的領導，才能帶國家走出泥淖；馬總統必須加快腳步打破僵滯之局，否則社會一直被無力感糾纏，人民將噩夢不斷。三，要有分享及下放權力的氣度。國家發展不可能只靠元首一人，他必須超越黨派格局善用人才，若局限在小決策圈中反覆用同一套思維處事，將難有轉機。
不可諱言，馬總統過度循規蹈矩的作風，多少拘礙了他力圖改革的腳步，也因此不易推動開創性的決策。更遺憾的是，林益世的貪瀆弊案，不僅重創了馬團隊形象，也暴露了馬總統的昧於知人，這是他的黨、政雙危機。因此，馬政府若只是重申反貪宣示，或在那裡消極坐待特偵組的調查，皆不足以回應社會大眾的憤怒和失望。面對這樣的迎頭痛擊，馬總統若還不知道要拿出行動挽回聲望，那還能奢談歷史定位嗎？
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 6, 2012
Summary: The Lin Yi-shi corruption case has dealt a major blow to President Ma's reputation. Public approval has plummeted to a new low of 15%. The Special Investigation Unit took immediate action and worked on the case for several days straight. But if the Ma administration wants to reverse the decline, it must take more convincing action. Only then can it re-unite the people, and restore national morale.
Full Text below:
The Lin Yi-shi corruption case has dealt a major blow to President Ma's reputation. Public approval has plummeted to a new low of 15%. The Special Investigation Unit took immediate action and worked on the case for several days straight. But if the Ma administration wants to reverse the decline, it must take more convincing action. Only then can it re-unite the people, and restore national morale.
Lin Yi-shi abused his power as Secretary-General of the Executive Yuan to engage in corruption. He was immediately taken into custody. Clearly, the justice system has greater independence than before. But Ma Ying-jeou promoted Lin Yi-shi repeatedly. He contributed to LIn's unbridled arrogance. He is going to have a hard time avoiding ridicule for being a poor judge of character who was easily deceived. Turning everything over to the justice system will not make this go away. Superficially the matter pertains to Lin Yi-shi alone. But the Ma administration has stumbled repeatedly. The Lin corruption scandal has further undermined the Ma administration's prestige and popularity. This is what the ruling administration should concentrate on during this crisis.
President Ma has attempted to cope with the crisis, internally and externally, for several days. But the public senses little determination to turn the tide. One. When Ma first learned that a news magazine had blown the scandal wide open, he asked Lin Yi-shi to hold a press conference and explain himself. Nothing more. This made Ma look gullible and passive. Two. Ma subsequently issued a series of public apologies. But none came across as sincere, including his admonition that administration personnel should "learn a lesson from this." Ma's spin was disingenuous. It implied that he had nothing to do with it. Three. Ma's responses to any criticisms of his administration have never been convincing, Reciting "clean government" slogans merely reveals the impotence behind his good intentions.
Now in particular, dangers await. The affairs of state are overwhelming. Yet President Ma persists in his pro forma itinerary, giving speechs everywhere. He even presented certificates to comrades in the Central Standing Committee. He failed to allocate time to matters of state, or strengthen his resolve on national policy. Instead he shuttled back and forth, squandering valuable time on trivialities. Can this restore lost confidence in President Ma?
This does not mean a president must never participate in civic activities. It merely means he must reorder his priorities and make intelligent choices. If the nation's political and economic goals still need sorting out, yet leaders devote their time and energy to pro forma political speeches, how can they possibly rally the people to action?
Why was a corrupt martinet like Lin Yi-shi seen as a political golden boy? Beginning with Ma's first term. critics have repeatedly urged Ma to widen the circles from which he draws his staff and policy makers. They have urged him to listen more to suggestions from his presidential advisors, national policy advisors, and community leaders. President Ma loves giving talks before small groups. This has never changed. President Ma, when was the last time you heard this admonition? Do you remember who it was who gave you this advice?
President Ma is an honest man. He has integrity. Of this we need have no doubt. But honesty and integrity are personal virtues. To be a national leader in the public sector requires more. That is the gap that President Ma must fill. This involves three keys. One. The desire to lead must be transformed into concrete action. One cannot simply make ringing declarations and leave it at that. Ma Ying-jeou's political training has led to an over-reliance on political declarations, accompanied by a lack of actual follow-through. He must not muddle through a second four-year term. Otherwise he will accomplish nothing. Two. Ma must have a sense of urgency. Taiwan has been immoblized by internal bickering for years. Stronger leadership is required to lead the country out of its morass. President Ma must pick up the pace. He must break the deadlock. Otherwise, society will remain paralyzed by feelings of impotence, and the national nightmare will never end. Three. Ma must be willing to share power and delegate authority. A nation's development must not depend upon a single head of state. He must transcend partisanship and make the best use of human talent. If Ma continues to rely on his tiny circle of decision-makers things are unlikely to take a turn for the better.
President Ma is too much of a conformist. This cannot be denied. It has hampered his efforts at reform. It has made it hard to implement groundbreaking policies. Even more regrettable are Lin Yi-shi's corruption scandals. These have undermined the Ma administration's image. They have shown President Ma to be a poor judge of character. This is a crisis of governance, both for Ma's party and for the Ma administration. If the Ma administration merely parrots its anti-corruption declaration, or passively waits for the Special Investigation Unit to announce its findings, it cannot mollify public anger and disappointment. The Lin corruption scandal was a slap in Ma's face. President Ma must act to restore his reputation. Otherwise he can forget about any historical legacy.
馬總統的宣示不足回應社會期待
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.06
受林益世貪瀆案影響，馬總統原已捉襟見肘的聲望再受重挫，民意支持度已降至一成五之新低。儘管特偵組偵辦行動連日皆有斬獲，但馬政府若要扭轉頹勢，勢必拿出更具說服力的實際行動，才能重新凝聚民心、振作國家士氣。
林益世以行政院祕書長之高位涉貪，旋即遭到羈押，顯示司法之獨立性已日漸建立。但從政治面看，馬英九過去對林益世的不次拔擢，助長其驕恣氣焰，實難脫「識人不明」及「易受欺矇」之譏，這恐非一句「一切交給司法」即可交代。亦即，此案表面上是林益世個人操守問題，但在馬政府施政連連失利之際，這對執政團隊的領導威望及人民望治心切之情都是雪上加霜，這才應是主政者面對此一危機的著眼點。
然而，從馬總統連日對內對外的因應，人們卻看不到他展現雄心、力挽狂瀾的方法。第一，他最初得悉雜誌將爆料弊案，僅要求林益世開記者會說明，顯得輕信而被動。第二，他其後連續公開道歉都顯得誠意不足，包括要求執政團隊「記取教訓」，語意失準，彷彿自己還可以置身事外。第三，他回應外界質疑始終缺乏力量，反覆宣示幾句「清廉執政」口號，至少暴露其心餘力絀。
尤其，在此危機四伏、國事如麻之際，馬總統照舊每天進行一些非關緊要的儀式性參訪行程，到處致詞演說，包括頒發中常委證書給從政同志。不把寶貴的時間用來思考國是，為治國大政沉澱心志，卻穿梭在細瑣的行程中虛耗時光，馬總統如何挽回他失去的民心？
這並不是說總統不該參加民間活動，而是必須權衡輕重緩急而有所選擇。如果國家政經大計正待全力衝刺整合，而領導人卻把時間和心思花在一些行禮如儀的事務上，每天發表一些無足輕重的演說，如何號召全民行動？
為什麼一個貪瀆跋扈的林益世，竟被當成政治金童重用？從上屆任期開始，輿論要求他擴大選才圈及決策圈的建言即不曾間斷，包括應多聽取資政、國策顧問乃至社會賢能之士的建言，但馬總統樂在小場合演說的習慣始終未改。請問馬總統：你上一次聽到諫言是什麼時候的事？你又記得誰的什麼忠告？
馬總統是個廉潔、正直的人，這點毋需懷疑。但無論如何，廉潔正直只是個人修養的範疇，這和在公領域成為一個好的國家領導人還有很大的距離，那正是馬總統必須設法填補的差距。其中有三個重要關鍵：一，是要將領導的心志具體化為「行動」，不能停格在「宣示」的層次。馬英九的從政訓練導致他過度倚賴宣示，行動力和執行力相對不足；這點，在第二個四年任期不能再含糊以對，否則將一事無成。二，要有時間的迫切感。台灣陷於內耗多年，必須要強而有魄力的領導，才能帶國家走出泥淖；馬總統必須加快腳步打破僵滯之局，否則社會一直被無力感糾纏，人民將噩夢不斷。三，要有分享及下放權力的氣度。國家發展不可能只靠元首一人，他必須超越黨派格局善用人才，若局限在小決策圈中反覆用同一套思維處事，將難有轉機。
不可諱言，馬總統過度循規蹈矩的作風，多少拘礙了他力圖改革的腳步，也因此不易推動開創性的決策。更遺憾的是，林益世的貪瀆弊案，不僅重創了馬團隊形象，也暴露了馬總統的昧於知人，這是他的黨、政雙危機。因此，馬政府若只是重申反貪宣示，或在那裡消極坐待特偵組的調查，皆不足以回應社會大眾的憤怒和失望。面對這樣的迎頭痛擊，馬總統若還不知道要拿出行動挽回聲望，那還能奢談歷史定位嗎？
End Blue vs. Green Enmity: Taiwan Needs Unity
End Blue vs. Green Enmity: Taiwan Needs Unity
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 1, 2012
Summary: At a recent forum, National Federation of Industries Chairman Rock Hsu said Taiwan's economy is drowning. What he meant was that people on Taiwan are like drowning men clutching at each other. The result is they drag each other down, and society as a whole sinks to the bottom even faster. Recently, two Blue Camp mayors shook hands, saying they hold no grudges, they merely want unity. What Taiwan needs is unity even if one still holds a grudge. On the world stage there must be no Blue or Green, there must only be Taiwan.
Full Text below:
At a recent forum, National Federation of Industries Chairman Rock Hsu said Taiwan's economy is drowning. What he meant was that people on Taiwan are like drowning men clutching at each other. The result is they drag each other down, and society as a whole sinks to the bottom even faster.
Rock Hsu said when he was younger, he almost drowned. A classmate jumped in the water to save him. But in his panic, Hsu desperately grabbed onto his classmate for dear life. As a result, they both sank and almost drowned. Hsu cited his own experience as a metaphor for Taiwan. His remark may strike a chord in many people. But to be honest, the situation on Taiwan is worse than what Rock Hsu described. A drowning man will frantically grab whoever is next to him out of blind desperation. But on Taiwan the motive is often different. On Taiwan, it is often a desire to take others down, to exploit them. It is less a desire to seek escape than a desire to drag others down, trip others up, and hold others back. This pattern of behavior merely ensures that everyone drowns and no one survives.
A drowning man does not deliberately drag someone else down with him. His is a reflex action. But Blue vs. Green infighting, ruling vs. opposition party infighting, and partisan infighting are "cost be damned" efforts to destroy each other. Unfortunately, the cost is often borne by the public. It often sacrifices the nation's prosperity and the peoples' well-being. Taiwan's situation could be likened to the Russo-Japanese War. Between 1904 and 1905, the Japanese Empire and the Russian Empire fought each other in Manchu-ruled China. The Qing government specially designated a war zone. The Japanese won. But statistics show that the Russo-Japanese War caused 20,000 Chinese civilian casualties, and property damage equivalent to 69 million catties of silver. The local Manchus could not help but lament, "The victorious Japanese rejoiced. The defeated Russians celebrated."
There is a popular expression in the Minan dialect, "Others eat rice noodles. I shout burn!" It means that there is no point in getting excited over things that have nothing to do with you. The Russo-Japanese War was a case of "Others eat rice noodles. I shout burn!" The "I" in Blue vs. Green confrontation on Taiwan today, is you, me, and him. Taiwan was once first among the Four Asian Tigers. Now it is the last. Taiwan once walked with its head up. Now it walks with its head down. Taiwan was once the "Taiwan Economic Miracle." Now it is the "Taiwan Joke." Taiwan was once the "Avenger Union." Now it is the "Voyage to Paradise." Who has been injured, traumatized, victimized, if not everyone on Taiwan?
Together we have experienced dramatic changes over the past two decades. These two decades are lost to us forever. During these two decades, the world turned upside down. On Taiwan, fundamental internal and external changes took place, simultaneously. Starting salaries for university graduates remained unchanged for two decades. In other words, during all that time, there was zero growth. But how did this happen? Andy Grove, former Intel CEO, said businesses inevitably undergo a period during which suddenly the situation is different, and things have changed. This is usually when a company is facing a strategic turning point. Grove said, "There is at least one point in the history of any company when you have to change dramatically to rise to the next level of performance. Miss that moment - and you start to decline." Grove pointed out that businesses encounter four strategic inflection points. One. Senior management experiences cognitive dissonance because the company has stopped growing but has no idea why. Two. Entrepreneurs smugly assume they are doing certain things. In fact they are unwittingly doing something else entirely. Three. Chaos pervades the company. Employees cling to their jobs. Disputes rage without end. Four. Faced with such circumstances, middle and upper management are utterly impotent and utterly clueless.
This is the situation on Taiwan today. Grove was not saying that when these phenomena appear the company is doomed. He was merely reminding entrepreneurs that when a company detects these signals it means that the old tricks, the old strategies, and the old choices are no longer viable. Therefore they must be rethought. Therefore a new strategy is needed. Every business, every country faces different challenges at different stages. The important point is that amidst panic entrepreneurs must detect the strategic turning points, and negotiate the turns.
Taiwan's problems require more than the wisdom of its businessmen. Its political leadership needs wisdom as well. The habit of internal bickering leads to results even worse than those experienced by a drowning man. Polarization has permeated political views, social class, party affiliation, even individual lifestyles. An obvious example is widespread anti-business sentiment and hatred for the rich. Many people have unconsciously adopted an attitude of "Schadenfreude" toward others.
Recently, two Blue Camp mayors shook hands, saying they hold no grudges, they merely want unity. What Taiwan needs is unity even if one still holds a grudge. On the world stage there must be no Blue or Green, there must only be Taiwan.
破除藍綠心結 台灣需要大團結
2012-07-01
中國時報
全國工業總會理事長許勝雄日前在一個論壇上表示，他認為台灣經濟已進入「溺水式的困境」。意思是說，台灣現在就如同溺水的人一般地互相拉扯，造成了整個社會更快速、更嚴重的陷溺。
許勝雄說，他少年時曾經溺水，當時有位同學跳下水去救他，而他把同學視為唯一的希望，就不顧一切地死命抱住同學，結果造成兩人一同向下沉淪。許勝雄以自己的經驗比喻台灣，這番描述可能會讓很多人心有戚戚；不過，老實講，台灣的現狀可能比許勝雄所形容的還要更不好。畢竟溺水的人之所以會瘋狂地抓住旁邊的人，往往是出於一種求生本能，但是看看台灣的情況，互相抵消、消耗的人，與其說是想要給自己求一條生路，不如說是更想要困住、絆住、扯住對方；這種行為模式，最終會連自己都游不出去。
溺水者並沒有想要讓對方滅頂的意思，但台灣的藍綠對立、朝野對立、政黨對立，卻是要「不計一切代價」地毀滅對方。不幸的是，所謂的不計一切代價，往往就是指犧牲國家發展與人民福祉。台灣的處境就像當年的日俄戰爭。一九○四、一九○五年間，日本帝國和俄羅斯帝國在中國（清朝滿州）的土地上打仗，清朝政府為這場戰爭專門劃出了一塊交戰區，最後日本取得勝利；然而，據統計，日俄戰爭造成中國平民傷亡兩萬人，財產損失折合白銀六千九百萬兩。當地的滿州人不禁發出悲嘆：「日勝何喜，俄敗何欣。」
台語有句俗諺說：「別人吃米粉，我喊燒！」形容事不關己的熱心沒有意義，當年的日俄戰爭卻是「別人吃米粉，我被燒」。今天台灣的藍綠大對抗裡的「我」，就是你、就是我、就是他！台灣從亞洲四小龍之首變成之尾、之外；從「走路有風」變成「走路漏風」；從「台灣奇蹟」變成「台灣滑稽」；從「海角一樂園」變成「復仇者聯盟」，受傷、受創、受害的，豈不正是台灣的每一個人嗎？
我們一同經歷劇烈變動的二十年、「回不去了」的二十年！這二十年時間裡，世界出現天翻地覆的變化，台灣也出現了根本性的變化，內、外變化加在一起，最具體的結果就是台灣的大學畢業生的起薪近二十年沒有變化，意思是沒有成長。然而，這一切，究竟是怎麼發生的呢？前英特爾總裁葛洛夫說，企業總有一段時間會感覺到「欸，情況不一樣了，事情變了。」通常這就是企業面臨「策略轉折點」的時刻；他的名言是：「如果無法順利通過轉折點，企業便會在越過高峰之後，往下滑落。」葛洛夫指出，企業出現策略轉折點的情境有四：一，經營階層感到煩亂，因為公司業績無法成長，但卻又說不出確切的原因；二，經營者以為自己是在做某些事情，然而，實際上卻是另一回事；三，公司內部混亂，團隊成員各持已見、紛爭不斷；四，面對現狀，中高階層經理人一籌莫展，無計可施。
感覺起來，這些情況跟現在的台灣很類似，不過，葛洛夫並不是認為當出現這些現象時，這家公司就完蛋了，而是提醒經營者，一旦公司有這些訊號，那就表示「過去的招數、策略、選擇，已經不管用了」，因此要思考、提出新的策略。每個企業、每個國家都可能在不同的階段面臨不同的挑戰，重點是在經歷一段慌亂的時光之後，經營者能不能明確抓住策略轉折點，並在轉折中再次躍進。
台灣的問題當然不只是國家經營者智慧、領導力有待提升，內部互相消耗的慣性，帶來結果可能比溺水者更糟糕。從政治立場到社會階層、從政黨到生活，台灣的對立甚至已滲透到深層意識，「反商」、「仇富」只是其中比較明顯例子，可能很多人已在不知不覺中養成了「見不得別人好」的價值觀。
日前，兩位藍營的五都首長握手言歡，表示彼此間「沒有心結、只有團結」。其實，台灣更需要的是「就算有心結也要團結」的氣度與格局。要知道，在世界的舞台上，沒有藍綠，只有台灣。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 1, 2012
Summary: At a recent forum, National Federation of Industries Chairman Rock Hsu said Taiwan's economy is drowning. What he meant was that people on Taiwan are like drowning men clutching at each other. The result is they drag each other down, and society as a whole sinks to the bottom even faster. Recently, two Blue Camp mayors shook hands, saying they hold no grudges, they merely want unity. What Taiwan needs is unity even if one still holds a grudge. On the world stage there must be no Blue or Green, there must only be Taiwan.
Full Text below:
At a recent forum, National Federation of Industries Chairman Rock Hsu said Taiwan's economy is drowning. What he meant was that people on Taiwan are like drowning men clutching at each other. The result is they drag each other down, and society as a whole sinks to the bottom even faster.
Rock Hsu said when he was younger, he almost drowned. A classmate jumped in the water to save him. But in his panic, Hsu desperately grabbed onto his classmate for dear life. As a result, they both sank and almost drowned. Hsu cited his own experience as a metaphor for Taiwan. His remark may strike a chord in many people. But to be honest, the situation on Taiwan is worse than what Rock Hsu described. A drowning man will frantically grab whoever is next to him out of blind desperation. But on Taiwan the motive is often different. On Taiwan, it is often a desire to take others down, to exploit them. It is less a desire to seek escape than a desire to drag others down, trip others up, and hold others back. This pattern of behavior merely ensures that everyone drowns and no one survives.
A drowning man does not deliberately drag someone else down with him. His is a reflex action. But Blue vs. Green infighting, ruling vs. opposition party infighting, and partisan infighting are "cost be damned" efforts to destroy each other. Unfortunately, the cost is often borne by the public. It often sacrifices the nation's prosperity and the peoples' well-being. Taiwan's situation could be likened to the Russo-Japanese War. Between 1904 and 1905, the Japanese Empire and the Russian Empire fought each other in Manchu-ruled China. The Qing government specially designated a war zone. The Japanese won. But statistics show that the Russo-Japanese War caused 20,000 Chinese civilian casualties, and property damage equivalent to 69 million catties of silver. The local Manchus could not help but lament, "The victorious Japanese rejoiced. The defeated Russians celebrated."
There is a popular expression in the Minan dialect, "Others eat rice noodles. I shout burn!" It means that there is no point in getting excited over things that have nothing to do with you. The Russo-Japanese War was a case of "Others eat rice noodles. I shout burn!" The "I" in Blue vs. Green confrontation on Taiwan today, is you, me, and him. Taiwan was once first among the Four Asian Tigers. Now it is the last. Taiwan once walked with its head up. Now it walks with its head down. Taiwan was once the "Taiwan Economic Miracle." Now it is the "Taiwan Joke." Taiwan was once the "Avenger Union." Now it is the "Voyage to Paradise." Who has been injured, traumatized, victimized, if not everyone on Taiwan?
Together we have experienced dramatic changes over the past two decades. These two decades are lost to us forever. During these two decades, the world turned upside down. On Taiwan, fundamental internal and external changes took place, simultaneously. Starting salaries for university graduates remained unchanged for two decades. In other words, during all that time, there was zero growth. But how did this happen? Andy Grove, former Intel CEO, said businesses inevitably undergo a period during which suddenly the situation is different, and things have changed. This is usually when a company is facing a strategic turning point. Grove said, "There is at least one point in the history of any company when you have to change dramatically to rise to the next level of performance. Miss that moment - and you start to decline." Grove pointed out that businesses encounter four strategic inflection points. One. Senior management experiences cognitive dissonance because the company has stopped growing but has no idea why. Two. Entrepreneurs smugly assume they are doing certain things. In fact they are unwittingly doing something else entirely. Three. Chaos pervades the company. Employees cling to their jobs. Disputes rage without end. Four. Faced with such circumstances, middle and upper management are utterly impotent and utterly clueless.
This is the situation on Taiwan today. Grove was not saying that when these phenomena appear the company is doomed. He was merely reminding entrepreneurs that when a company detects these signals it means that the old tricks, the old strategies, and the old choices are no longer viable. Therefore they must be rethought. Therefore a new strategy is needed. Every business, every country faces different challenges at different stages. The important point is that amidst panic entrepreneurs must detect the strategic turning points, and negotiate the turns.
Taiwan's problems require more than the wisdom of its businessmen. Its political leadership needs wisdom as well. The habit of internal bickering leads to results even worse than those experienced by a drowning man. Polarization has permeated political views, social class, party affiliation, even individual lifestyles. An obvious example is widespread anti-business sentiment and hatred for the rich. Many people have unconsciously adopted an attitude of "Schadenfreude" toward others.
Recently, two Blue Camp mayors shook hands, saying they hold no grudges, they merely want unity. What Taiwan needs is unity even if one still holds a grudge. On the world stage there must be no Blue or Green, there must only be Taiwan.
破除藍綠心結 台灣需要大團結
2012-07-01
中國時報
全國工業總會理事長許勝雄日前在一個論壇上表示，他認為台灣經濟已進入「溺水式的困境」。意思是說，台灣現在就如同溺水的人一般地互相拉扯，造成了整個社會更快速、更嚴重的陷溺。
許勝雄說，他少年時曾經溺水，當時有位同學跳下水去救他，而他把同學視為唯一的希望，就不顧一切地死命抱住同學，結果造成兩人一同向下沉淪。許勝雄以自己的經驗比喻台灣，這番描述可能會讓很多人心有戚戚；不過，老實講，台灣的現狀可能比許勝雄所形容的還要更不好。畢竟溺水的人之所以會瘋狂地抓住旁邊的人，往往是出於一種求生本能，但是看看台灣的情況，互相抵消、消耗的人，與其說是想要給自己求一條生路，不如說是更想要困住、絆住、扯住對方；這種行為模式，最終會連自己都游不出去。
溺水者並沒有想要讓對方滅頂的意思，但台灣的藍綠對立、朝野對立、政黨對立，卻是要「不計一切代價」地毀滅對方。不幸的是，所謂的不計一切代價，往往就是指犧牲國家發展與人民福祉。台灣的處境就像當年的日俄戰爭。一九○四、一九○五年間，日本帝國和俄羅斯帝國在中國（清朝滿州）的土地上打仗，清朝政府為這場戰爭專門劃出了一塊交戰區，最後日本取得勝利；然而，據統計，日俄戰爭造成中國平民傷亡兩萬人，財產損失折合白銀六千九百萬兩。當地的滿州人不禁發出悲嘆：「日勝何喜，俄敗何欣。」
台語有句俗諺說：「別人吃米粉，我喊燒！」形容事不關己的熱心沒有意義，當年的日俄戰爭卻是「別人吃米粉，我被燒」。今天台灣的藍綠大對抗裡的「我」，就是你、就是我、就是他！台灣從亞洲四小龍之首變成之尾、之外；從「走路有風」變成「走路漏風」；從「台灣奇蹟」變成「台灣滑稽」；從「海角一樂園」變成「復仇者聯盟」，受傷、受創、受害的，豈不正是台灣的每一個人嗎？
我們一同經歷劇烈變動的二十年、「回不去了」的二十年！這二十年時間裡，世界出現天翻地覆的變化，台灣也出現了根本性的變化，內、外變化加在一起，最具體的結果就是台灣的大學畢業生的起薪近二十年沒有變化，意思是沒有成長。然而，這一切，究竟是怎麼發生的呢？前英特爾總裁葛洛夫說，企業總有一段時間會感覺到「欸，情況不一樣了，事情變了。」通常這就是企業面臨「策略轉折點」的時刻；他的名言是：「如果無法順利通過轉折點，企業便會在越過高峰之後，往下滑落。」葛洛夫指出，企業出現策略轉折點的情境有四：一，經營階層感到煩亂，因為公司業績無法成長，但卻又說不出確切的原因；二，經營者以為自己是在做某些事情，然而，實際上卻是另一回事；三，公司內部混亂，團隊成員各持已見、紛爭不斷；四，面對現狀，中高階層經理人一籌莫展，無計可施。
感覺起來，這些情況跟現在的台灣很類似，不過，葛洛夫並不是認為當出現這些現象時，這家公司就完蛋了，而是提醒經營者，一旦公司有這些訊號，那就表示「過去的招數、策略、選擇，已經不管用了」，因此要思考、提出新的策略。每個企業、每個國家都可能在不同的階段面臨不同的挑戰，重點是在經歷一段慌亂的時光之後，經營者能不能明確抓住策略轉折點，並在轉折中再次躍進。
台灣的問題當然不只是國家經營者智慧、領導力有待提升，內部互相消耗的慣性，帶來結果可能比溺水者更糟糕。從政治立場到社會階層、從政黨到生活，台灣的對立甚至已滲透到深層意識，「反商」、「仇富」只是其中比較明顯例子，可能很多人已在不知不覺中養成了「見不得別人好」的價值觀。
日前，兩位藍營的五都首長握手言歡，表示彼此間「沒有心結、只有團結」。其實，台灣更需要的是「就算有心結也要團結」的氣度與格局。要知道，在世界的舞台上，沒有藍綠，只有台灣。
Wednesday, July 4, 2012
Something to Look Forward To: A Su Tseng-chang Visit to the Mainland, or a Wen Jiabao Visit to Taiwan
Something to Look Forward To:
A Su Tseng-chang Visit to the Mainland, or a Wen Jiabao Visit to Taiwan
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 4, 2012
Summary: During an interview with Vision Magazine, Su Tseng-chang said he would be "willing to visit the Mainland as DPP Chairman, without preconditions." Su said that if Mainland Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao decides to visit Taiwan after stepping down, he would be willing to accompany Wen on a tour of Taiwan. This is a rare window of opportunity that neither the DPP nor the CCP should pass up lightly.
Full Text below:
During an interview with Vision Magazine, Su Tseng-chang said he would be "willing to visit the Mainland as DPP Chairman, without preconditions." Su said that if Mainland Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao decides to visit Taiwan after stepping down, he would be willing to accompany Wen on a tour of Taiwan.
This is a rare window of opportunity that neither the DPP nor the CCP should pass up lightly.
Wen Jiabao said he wanted to visit Taiwan, "even if he had to crawl to do it." If he is able to visit Taiwan, that will be a major breakthrough in cross-Strait relations. But if the invitation to Wen Jiabao came from the Blue camp, the DPP would vehemently oppose it. Fortunately Su Tseng-chang was the one who opened his mouth and volunteered to act as Wen's tour guide. Wen's concerns have been halved. Therefore, there is no reason to miss this excellent opportunity. Accepting Premier Wen's direct invitation to visit the Mainland may be awkward for the DPP. In that case, the invitiation could be made at the behest of Taiwan businessmen. When Wen arrives on Taiwan, Su Tseng-chang could then act as host, and show Wen around.
If Wen Jiabao visits Taiwan, the impact would be comparable to Lien Chan's "ice-breaking journey" to Beijing in 2005. Back then, Lien Chan was mending fences between the KMT and the CCP. Wen Jiabao's visit to Taiwan, with Su Tseng-chang acting as his tour guide, would be an opportunity for the DPP and the CCP to transform their inter-party relations.
This is a window of opportunity for the two parties. It enables them to engage each other publicly. Once Wen steps down, he can visit Taiwan as a private citizen. His nominal purpose would be tourism. Su Tseng-chang could accompany him as a tour guide. This would mask the political significance. A sugar coating of tourism would make it easier for both sides to swallow this medicine. The political benefits of such a visit cannot be underestimated.
For the DPP, superficially only the party chairman would be acting as Wen's tour guide. Yet such a visit could radically transform the DPP's "[Mainland] China policy." For the CCP, can Su Tseng-chang playing host to Wen Jiabao change the relationship between the two parties? Or will the DPP cling to its Taiwan independence dogma and refuse to deal with the CCP on a party to party basis? Will the DPP refuse to see the forest for the trees?
Su Tseng-chang visiting the Mainland would be harder than Wen Jiabao visiting Taiwan. Wen can claim that he is merely a tourist. Su by contrast, has no pretext to exploit. If Su Tseng-chang wants visit the Mainland, he will have to make additional preparations. Su said that if he visits the Mainland, he will not shout "Long live the Republic of China, Taiwan independence" the moment he steps off the plane. Su said the DPP is not like that, nor does he intend to act like that. Su Tseng-chang has always struck people as someone who "does not speak from the heart." His flippant remark did nothing to alter that impression. Beijing has never said "Long live the Republic of China." Su Tseng-chang has never said "Long live the Republic of China" even when he was on Taiwan. Su Tseng-chang said the KMT does not dare advocate "one China, different interpretations" on the Mainland. But how is this any different from Su Tseng-chang not daring to shout "Taiwan independence" on the Mainland? Su Tseng-chang clearly knows cross-Strait relations are a delicate matter. Yet he takes advantage of the situation to mock the KMT. He refuses to look himself in the mirror. As usual Su is "not speaking from the heart."
We feel that either Wen Jiabao visiting Taiwan or Su Tseng-chang visiting the Mainland deserve our support. Exchanges at this level will inevitably affect the DPP and CCP's attitude toward cross-Strait policy. In 2005 Lien Chan's visit to the Mainland changed the relationship between the KMT and the CCP. The "five prospects for peace" changed the six decade long cross-Strait relationship.
If Su Tseng-chang visits the Mainland. he can of course join with Beijing to offer something similar to the "five prospects for peace." He can strengthen relations between the DPP and CCP. But he could also discuss "one country on each side" with the Beijing authorities, face to face. He could also mention "policies the DPP is unwilling to forsake." He, the DPP, and the public on Taiwan, could then assume responsibility for the consequences. This would be more responsible than merely shouting "Taiwan independence" on Taiwan. Beijing need not refuse party to party contacts merely because the DPP refuses to forsake Taiwan independence and refuses to have party to party contacts. Instead, the two parties should use party to party contacts to deal with the Taiwan independence issue, face to face. Besides Su Tseng-chang made it clear beforehand that he would not shout "Taiwan independence!" right after stepping off the plane.
Change is fermenting within the DPP over [Mainland] China Policy. Su Tseng-chang chose this moment to raise these issues. He should take the DPP's transformation very seriously. He should not use Wen Jiabao merely to score rhetorical points. Su Tseng-chang said that Beijing has long maintained that Taiwan is a province of China. He said this was something the Chinese Communists maintained 30 years ago. It has not said this for a long time. He said Beijing now says that "the Mainland and Taiwan both belong to one China." But why is Su turning the clock back 30 years? Su Tseng-chang mocked the Ma administration, saying it dared not speak of "one China, different interpretations" in Beijing. He is apparently unaware that the Ma administration made its "no [immediate] reunification, no independence, no use of force" declaration. He is apparently unaware that it is the tacit agreement preserving the status quo between Taipei, Washington, and Beijing. Su may wish to accompany Premier Wen on a tour of Taiwan. Su may wish to visit Mainland China. But if Su thinks he can muddle his way through by cutting and pasting cross-Strait policy on an ad hoc basis, he has another think coming. He would be an ungracious host. He would be an unwelcome guest. Before he visits the Mainland or acts as a tour guide, Su Tseng-chang first needs to lead a cross-Strait policy debate within the Democratic Progressive Party.
Su Tseng-chang has put his cards on the table. Will Beijing dare to respond? Both sides of the Taiwan Strait can only wait and see.
樂見蘇貞昌登陸及溫家寶訪台
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.04
蘇貞昌接受《遠見雜誌》專訪說，他願意在「沒有預設任何前提下」，以民進黨主席身分訪問中國；而中國總理溫家寶卸任後若是來台，他也願意陪溫家寶看看台灣。
這是一扇難得開啟的機會之窗，民進黨及中共雙方皆應認真面對，不要輕率錯過。
溫家寶曾說「就是爬也要爬去」，他若能訪台，應是兩岸關係的重大突破。然而，倘是由藍營出面邀訪溫家寶，民進黨必定大力反對；如今既是蘇貞昌首先開口願任導遊，溫氏來台的顧慮即降低了大半，所以沒有理由錯失這個大好機遇。民進黨即使不便直接邀溫家寶來訪，也可通過台商等名義相邀；待溫抵台，再由蘇貞昌作東，陪著看看台灣。
溫家寶若能訪台，其效應可以比擬連戰在二○○五年訪問北京的「破冰之旅」；只是連戰操作的是重建國共兩黨關係，溫家寶來台由蘇貞昌擔任「地陪」，則將是民共兩黨關係轉變的契機。
這是民共兩黨的機會之窗。溫以卸任裸退的身分來訪，而以遊覽為名目；蘇則以「陪遊」的名義作東，掩蓋了政治色彩。這塊塗上「旅遊」甜醬的燒餅，兩方都比較容易下嚥；但其政治效應卻不可輕估。
就民進黨而言，表面上只是黨主席接待溫氏遊覽而已，但骨子裡卻必是該黨整個「中國政策」轉型的大考驗，甚至可能因此觸動了民進黨「中國政策」的大幅修正。另對於中共而言，倘不能藉「蘇貞昌接待溫家寶」作為轉變民共兩黨關係的槓桿，卻仍固執於「不放棄台獨／不可黨對黨」的教條，便未免見樹不見林。
相較之下，蘇貞昌訪陸比溫家寶來台不易。因為，溫有遊覽之名，蘇則沒有可以假借的名目。蘇貞昌若要訪陸，其政治準備顯然尚待加強。例如他說：若訪陸，不會一下飛機就高喊「中華民國萬歲，台灣獨立」；民進黨不是這樣，也不準備這樣。這一段話充分顯露了蘇貞昌一貫予人的言不由衷的印象。其實，莫說到北京不會說「中華民國萬歲」，蘇貞昌又何嘗在台灣說過「中華民國萬歲」？再者，蘇貞昌說，國民黨不敢在中國說「一中各表」，但這與蘇貞昌說不會到大陸喊「台灣獨立」何異？蘇貞昌明知兩岸之情勢微妙如此，卻只用來訕笑國民黨，而不知自我檢討，這豈不是言不由衷？
我們認為，不論是溫家寶來台，或蘇貞昌訪陸，皆是值得支持鼓勵的動作。因為，這種層次的訪問，必然會牽動民共兩黨在兩岸政策上的新思考與新方法；正如二○○五年的連戰訪陸改變了國共兩黨的互動，以「和平五願景」全盤改變了六十年來的兩岸關係。
因而，如果蘇貞昌訪問大陸，他固然可與北京一同端出「和平新五願景」之類的架構，重建民共兩黨關係；但其實他也可以當面與北京當局討論「一邊一國」，或「民進黨不能被迫放棄的主張」，然後與民進黨及台灣人民共同承當此一情勢，這也比「只在台灣喊台獨」來得負責。而北京方面，亦不必因民進黨「不放棄台獨」而拒絕「黨對黨」的接觸；而應以「黨對黨」的接觸，與民進黨一同面對面處理台獨議題。何況，蘇貞昌已有言在先：「不會一下飛機就高喊台灣獨立！」
民進黨內正在醞釀調整中國政策，蘇貞昌在此時拋出這些話題，應嚴肅面對民進黨的轉型問題，不能只想利用溫家寶來沾一沾政治口水。例如，蘇貞昌表示，北京一直說「台灣是中國的一個省」，但這卻是中共三十年前的主張，久已不彈此調，現在的說法已改為「大陸與台灣同屬一個中國」，則蘇貞昌何必偏要將中共拉回三十年前？又如，蘇貞昌調侃馬政府不敢在北京說「一中各表」，卻似未見馬政府「不統／不獨／不武」的宣示，儼然已成台美中三方維持現狀的默契。因而，無論要陪溫家寶遊台灣，或自己往訪大陸，蘇貞昌若想只靠他這些剪剪貼貼的兩岸論述來應付場面，不但作不成主人，也作不好客人。所以，在出訪或擔任地陪之前，蘇貞昌皆應先完成民進黨內的兩岸政策大辯論再說。
蘇貞昌已出牌，北京方面敢不敢接招，兩岸皆在拭目以待。
A Su Tseng-chang Visit to the Mainland, or a Wen Jiabao Visit to Taiwan
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 4, 2012
Summary: During an interview with Vision Magazine, Su Tseng-chang said he would be "willing to visit the Mainland as DPP Chairman, without preconditions." Su said that if Mainland Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao decides to visit Taiwan after stepping down, he would be willing to accompany Wen on a tour of Taiwan. This is a rare window of opportunity that neither the DPP nor the CCP should pass up lightly.
Full Text below:
During an interview with Vision Magazine, Su Tseng-chang said he would be "willing to visit the Mainland as DPP Chairman, without preconditions." Su said that if Mainland Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao decides to visit Taiwan after stepping down, he would be willing to accompany Wen on a tour of Taiwan.
This is a rare window of opportunity that neither the DPP nor the CCP should pass up lightly.
Wen Jiabao said he wanted to visit Taiwan, "even if he had to crawl to do it." If he is able to visit Taiwan, that will be a major breakthrough in cross-Strait relations. But if the invitation to Wen Jiabao came from the Blue camp, the DPP would vehemently oppose it. Fortunately Su Tseng-chang was the one who opened his mouth and volunteered to act as Wen's tour guide. Wen's concerns have been halved. Therefore, there is no reason to miss this excellent opportunity. Accepting Premier Wen's direct invitation to visit the Mainland may be awkward for the DPP. In that case, the invitiation could be made at the behest of Taiwan businessmen. When Wen arrives on Taiwan, Su Tseng-chang could then act as host, and show Wen around.
If Wen Jiabao visits Taiwan, the impact would be comparable to Lien Chan's "ice-breaking journey" to Beijing in 2005. Back then, Lien Chan was mending fences between the KMT and the CCP. Wen Jiabao's visit to Taiwan, with Su Tseng-chang acting as his tour guide, would be an opportunity for the DPP and the CCP to transform their inter-party relations.
This is a window of opportunity for the two parties. It enables them to engage each other publicly. Once Wen steps down, he can visit Taiwan as a private citizen. His nominal purpose would be tourism. Su Tseng-chang could accompany him as a tour guide. This would mask the political significance. A sugar coating of tourism would make it easier for both sides to swallow this medicine. The political benefits of such a visit cannot be underestimated.
For the DPP, superficially only the party chairman would be acting as Wen's tour guide. Yet such a visit could radically transform the DPP's "[Mainland] China policy." For the CCP, can Su Tseng-chang playing host to Wen Jiabao change the relationship between the two parties? Or will the DPP cling to its Taiwan independence dogma and refuse to deal with the CCP on a party to party basis? Will the DPP refuse to see the forest for the trees?
Su Tseng-chang visiting the Mainland would be harder than Wen Jiabao visiting Taiwan. Wen can claim that he is merely a tourist. Su by contrast, has no pretext to exploit. If Su Tseng-chang wants visit the Mainland, he will have to make additional preparations. Su said that if he visits the Mainland, he will not shout "Long live the Republic of China, Taiwan independence" the moment he steps off the plane. Su said the DPP is not like that, nor does he intend to act like that. Su Tseng-chang has always struck people as someone who "does not speak from the heart." His flippant remark did nothing to alter that impression. Beijing has never said "Long live the Republic of China." Su Tseng-chang has never said "Long live the Republic of China" even when he was on Taiwan. Su Tseng-chang said the KMT does not dare advocate "one China, different interpretations" on the Mainland. But how is this any different from Su Tseng-chang not daring to shout "Taiwan independence" on the Mainland? Su Tseng-chang clearly knows cross-Strait relations are a delicate matter. Yet he takes advantage of the situation to mock the KMT. He refuses to look himself in the mirror. As usual Su is "not speaking from the heart."
We feel that either Wen Jiabao visiting Taiwan or Su Tseng-chang visiting the Mainland deserve our support. Exchanges at this level will inevitably affect the DPP and CCP's attitude toward cross-Strait policy. In 2005 Lien Chan's visit to the Mainland changed the relationship between the KMT and the CCP. The "five prospects for peace" changed the six decade long cross-Strait relationship.
If Su Tseng-chang visits the Mainland. he can of course join with Beijing to offer something similar to the "five prospects for peace." He can strengthen relations between the DPP and CCP. But he could also discuss "one country on each side" with the Beijing authorities, face to face. He could also mention "policies the DPP is unwilling to forsake." He, the DPP, and the public on Taiwan, could then assume responsibility for the consequences. This would be more responsible than merely shouting "Taiwan independence" on Taiwan. Beijing need not refuse party to party contacts merely because the DPP refuses to forsake Taiwan independence and refuses to have party to party contacts. Instead, the two parties should use party to party contacts to deal with the Taiwan independence issue, face to face. Besides Su Tseng-chang made it clear beforehand that he would not shout "Taiwan independence!" right after stepping off the plane.
Change is fermenting within the DPP over [Mainland] China Policy. Su Tseng-chang chose this moment to raise these issues. He should take the DPP's transformation very seriously. He should not use Wen Jiabao merely to score rhetorical points. Su Tseng-chang said that Beijing has long maintained that Taiwan is a province of China. He said this was something the Chinese Communists maintained 30 years ago. It has not said this for a long time. He said Beijing now says that "the Mainland and Taiwan both belong to one China." But why is Su turning the clock back 30 years? Su Tseng-chang mocked the Ma administration, saying it dared not speak of "one China, different interpretations" in Beijing. He is apparently unaware that the Ma administration made its "no [immediate] reunification, no independence, no use of force" declaration. He is apparently unaware that it is the tacit agreement preserving the status quo between Taipei, Washington, and Beijing. Su may wish to accompany Premier Wen on a tour of Taiwan. Su may wish to visit Mainland China. But if Su thinks he can muddle his way through by cutting and pasting cross-Strait policy on an ad hoc basis, he has another think coming. He would be an ungracious host. He would be an unwelcome guest. Before he visits the Mainland or acts as a tour guide, Su Tseng-chang first needs to lead a cross-Strait policy debate within the Democratic Progressive Party.
Su Tseng-chang has put his cards on the table. Will Beijing dare to respond? Both sides of the Taiwan Strait can only wait and see.
樂見蘇貞昌登陸及溫家寶訪台
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.04
蘇貞昌接受《遠見雜誌》專訪說，他願意在「沒有預設任何前提下」，以民進黨主席身分訪問中國；而中國總理溫家寶卸任後若是來台，他也願意陪溫家寶看看台灣。
這是一扇難得開啟的機會之窗，民進黨及中共雙方皆應認真面對，不要輕率錯過。
溫家寶曾說「就是爬也要爬去」，他若能訪台，應是兩岸關係的重大突破。然而，倘是由藍營出面邀訪溫家寶，民進黨必定大力反對；如今既是蘇貞昌首先開口願任導遊，溫氏來台的顧慮即降低了大半，所以沒有理由錯失這個大好機遇。民進黨即使不便直接邀溫家寶來訪，也可通過台商等名義相邀；待溫抵台，再由蘇貞昌作東，陪著看看台灣。
溫家寶若能訪台，其效應可以比擬連戰在二○○五年訪問北京的「破冰之旅」；只是連戰操作的是重建國共兩黨關係，溫家寶來台由蘇貞昌擔任「地陪」，則將是民共兩黨關係轉變的契機。
這是民共兩黨的機會之窗。溫以卸任裸退的身分來訪，而以遊覽為名目；蘇則以「陪遊」的名義作東，掩蓋了政治色彩。這塊塗上「旅遊」甜醬的燒餅，兩方都比較容易下嚥；但其政治效應卻不可輕估。
就民進黨而言，表面上只是黨主席接待溫氏遊覽而已，但骨子裡卻必是該黨整個「中國政策」轉型的大考驗，甚至可能因此觸動了民進黨「中國政策」的大幅修正。另對於中共而言，倘不能藉「蘇貞昌接待溫家寶」作為轉變民共兩黨關係的槓桿，卻仍固執於「不放棄台獨／不可黨對黨」的教條，便未免見樹不見林。
相較之下，蘇貞昌訪陸比溫家寶來台不易。因為，溫有遊覽之名，蘇則沒有可以假借的名目。蘇貞昌若要訪陸，其政治準備顯然尚待加強。例如他說：若訪陸，不會一下飛機就高喊「中華民國萬歲，台灣獨立」；民進黨不是這樣，也不準備這樣。這一段話充分顯露了蘇貞昌一貫予人的言不由衷的印象。其實，莫說到北京不會說「中華民國萬歲」，蘇貞昌又何嘗在台灣說過「中華民國萬歲」？再者，蘇貞昌說，國民黨不敢在中國說「一中各表」，但這與蘇貞昌說不會到大陸喊「台灣獨立」何異？蘇貞昌明知兩岸之情勢微妙如此，卻只用來訕笑國民黨，而不知自我檢討，這豈不是言不由衷？
我們認為，不論是溫家寶來台，或蘇貞昌訪陸，皆是值得支持鼓勵的動作。因為，這種層次的訪問，必然會牽動民共兩黨在兩岸政策上的新思考與新方法；正如二○○五年的連戰訪陸改變了國共兩黨的互動，以「和平五願景」全盤改變了六十年來的兩岸關係。
因而，如果蘇貞昌訪問大陸，他固然可與北京一同端出「和平新五願景」之類的架構，重建民共兩黨關係；但其實他也可以當面與北京當局討論「一邊一國」，或「民進黨不能被迫放棄的主張」，然後與民進黨及台灣人民共同承當此一情勢，這也比「只在台灣喊台獨」來得負責。而北京方面，亦不必因民進黨「不放棄台獨」而拒絕「黨對黨」的接觸；而應以「黨對黨」的接觸，與民進黨一同面對面處理台獨議題。何況，蘇貞昌已有言在先：「不會一下飛機就高喊台灣獨立！」
民進黨內正在醞釀調整中國政策，蘇貞昌在此時拋出這些話題，應嚴肅面對民進黨的轉型問題，不能只想利用溫家寶來沾一沾政治口水。例如，蘇貞昌表示，北京一直說「台灣是中國的一個省」，但這卻是中共三十年前的主張，久已不彈此調，現在的說法已改為「大陸與台灣同屬一個中國」，則蘇貞昌何必偏要將中共拉回三十年前？又如，蘇貞昌調侃馬政府不敢在北京說「一中各表」，卻似未見馬政府「不統／不獨／不武」的宣示，儼然已成台美中三方維持現狀的默契。因而，無論要陪溫家寶遊台灣，或自己往訪大陸，蘇貞昌若想只靠他這些剪剪貼貼的兩岸論述來應付場面，不但作不成主人，也作不好客人。所以，在出訪或擔任地陪之前，蘇貞昌皆應先完成民進黨內的兩岸政策大辯論再說。
蘇貞昌已出牌，北京方面敢不敢接招，兩岸皆在拭目以待。
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Say No to Corruption: A Red Card Means You're Out
Say No to Corruption: A Red Card Means You're Out
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 3, 2012
Summary: Lin Yi-shi was a rising star painstakingly cultivated by the KMT. Clearly it was a failed experiment. The Blue Camp pool of talent is stretched to the limit. The Ma administration is a poor judge of character. The corruption scandal is a heartbreaking lesson that has battered the image of the party. The only good news is that it has confirmed that the rule of law prevails, and is increasingly even-handed. Any politician who gets a Red Card is out of the game. No ifs, ands, or buts. After all, we are a country in which even a president who breaks the law is subject to the same punishment as a common person, let alone a mere Lin Yi-shi?
Full Text below:
After a night of interrogation, former Executive Yuan Secretary-General Lin Yi-shi was charged with several counts of political corruption. The Special Investigation Unit has detained him. Lin is the youngest ever Vice Chairman of the KMT. He is the Legislative Yuan party whip. He is the Executive Yuan Secretary-General. Lin Yi-shi is the golden boy of the KMT and the Ma administration. He was being groomed for high office. Now he is like a soccer player guilty of a violent foul. He has received a Red Card and has been suspended from the game, permanently. He has been expelled from the stadium. He has been humiliated.
In this particular case, the Special Investigation Unit deserves recognition. On June 27, The Weekly Edition broke the news. The Special Investigation Unit immediately began assigning individual cases. It prevented suspects from leaving the country, issued suspect alerts, obtained arrest and search warrants. On the fourth day it obtained an arrest warrant for Lin Yi-shi. As soon as hearings were concluded, he was held incommunicado.
Legislators and other elected officials have been known to abuse their power and influence. Many Blue and Green camp people are currently serving time. But Lin Yi-shi is an especially bitter disappointment. One. His alleged acts of bribery occurred just after Chen Shui-bian was convicted and imprisoned for political corruption. Public disgust with corruption was especially intense. Yet Lin debase himself anyway. He chose self-destructive greed. Two. President Ma held high the banner of "clean government." Lin Yi-shi occupied key positions within the party and within the administration. He did more than fail to lead by example. He wallowed in degradation. Three. After Lin Yi-shi lost his bid for reelection, he was apppointed Secretary-General of the Cabinet. President Ma trusted him. Now the image of the cabinet has been dealt a sever blow. Even worse, it leaves the impression that the president is a poor judge of character. The result is truly heartbreaking.
Let us examine the ins and outs of the case. Are George Chen's accusations against Lin Yi-shi true? That remains to be determined, by law enforcement and investigative officials. , Earlier this year, George Chen accused Lin Yi-shi of extortion. As a result China Steel Corporation was forced to cease supplying slag for some time. It may be that the Ti Yung Company illegally stored slag. The Kaohsiung Environmental Protection Agency repeatedly fined China Steel and ordered it to stop supplying product. George Chen was unable to obtain the product he neededd. Lin Yi-shi accepted bribes before. Chen expected Lin to help him out. He probably felt that Lin turned his back on him. Chen may have decided to blow the whistle on Lin. He may have decided to use the 63 million dollar bribe Lin accepted previously as leverage against him, even though they would both go down together. The result was a "golden boy" dug his own grave and jumped in it.
From what has been disclosed so far Lin Yi-shi's arrogance was incredible. For example Lin said, "I approved the Vanda CEO appointment." "I will take care of the matter. You will be very pleased with the results." "I'm the one who applies the Treasury Seal. I'm the one in charge of it." "The only ones who come to work at the Executive Yuan are the Premier, Vice Premier, and myself. The others are all my staffers." Listen to his tone. It is as if the entire Executive Yuan was in Lin Yi-shi's hands. This is the attitude of a petty dictator. President Ma, is this the same Lin Yi-shi you know?
The Lin corruption scandal has exposed the dark underbelly of government-run companies such as China Steel. Lin Yi-shi argued that the Ti Yung Company's construction costs exceeded 70 million dollars in two years. He said allegations that he extorted over 100 million dollars from them were "clearly exaggerated." Yet the exaggerated figures turned out to be true. As we can see, China Steel was ripe pickings for government vultures. China Steel even had a "Legislative Liason." What sort of funny business goes on in other government agencies without "Legislative Liasons?" Was China Steel guilty of wrongdoing? If so, someone will have to take the fall. If China Steel personnel are sued, perhaps in the future companies such as China Steel, China Petroleum, and Taipower will have a good excuse to "Just say no" to officials who demand bribes.
More than a few legislators have been indicted recently for demanding bribes. Cases include stealing and selling sand and gravel, illegal land development or rentals, illegal tour bus lines, or physician groups lobbying for compensation. Lin Yi-shi argued that his relationship with Ti Yung was perfectly above board. He was merely "serving his constituents." But his "service to his constituents" included demands for bribes. This commercialized the legislator's "service to his constituents." It turned it into quid pro quo transactions. It dressed up bribery as service to constituents. It twisted the meaning of the "service" provided by government agencies or public enterprises. It harmed the national interest. It abused public resources for the purpose of making a private profit. The biggest problem left over by the Lin corruption scandal is how to prevent politicians from making a private profit from public resources, all under the guise of "serving the constituents" or "reflecting the public will."
Lin Yi-shi was a rising star painstakingly cultivated by the KMT. Clearly it was a failed experiment. The Blue Camp pool of talent is stretched to the limit. The Ma administration is a poor judge of character. The corruption scandal is a heartbreaking lesson that has battered the image of the party. The only good news is that it has confirmed that the rule of law prevails, and is increasingly even-handed. Any politician who gets a Red Card is out of the game. No ifs, ands, or buts. After all, we are a country in which even a president who breaks the law is subject to the same punishment as a common person, let alone a mere Lin Yi-shi?
不可貪汙：紅牌祭出，立即出場！
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.03 01:53 am
經過徹夜偵訊，前行政院祕書長林益世以貪汙罪嫌重大，遭到特偵組聲押獲准。頂著國民黨最年輕副主席、立院大黨鞭、行政院祕書長等光環，林益世一路受到國民黨和馬政府的寵信與提拔；如今，他卻像在足球賽中惡性犯規的球員，紅牌祭出，立即被逐出了球場，狼狽萬狀。
在本案中，特偵組的表現值得肯定。六月二十七日，周刊爆料見刊，特偵組於第一時間立即剪報分案，然後馬上將相關人等限制出境，展開傳訊、拘提、搜索，至第四天即傳至林益世，訊完即聲請收押禁見。
立委或民代濫權關說，時有所聞，藍綠陣營均有多人仍在接受司法審判，而林案卻格外讓人感到痛心疾首，原因是：一，他涉嫌索賄的時段，正在陳水扁貪汙受審入獄之後，社會憎惡貪瀆的氣氛高漲，他卻不知自愛，刀口舔血。二，馬總統高舉「清廉執政」大旗，林益世歷任黨政重要幹部，非但不能以身作則，竟然自甘下流。三，林益世選舉失利後應命出任內閣祕書長要職，顯示馬總統對其的信任；但經過此案，不僅內閣形象受到重創，更暴露總統「昧於知人」，令人扼腕。
觀察來龍去脈，陳啟祥對林益世的種種指控是否全然屬實，仍有待檢調仔細查證。其中，例如陳啟祥指林益世今年初因索賄未遂，因而指使中鋼公司停止對其供應爐渣一節，實情可能是因地勇公司違法堆置爐渣，遭高雄環保局連續開罰並要求中鋼停止對其供貨；而陳啟祥因無法進料，要求曾經收賄的林益世協助關說卻未能如願，認為林翻臉不認人，於是利用前次交付六千三百萬賄款之把柄爆料，不惜與林益世偕亡，而使一個光鮮的「政治金童」就此跳進了自掘的墳墓。
從目前透露的案情中，林益世的言語之狂悖，實在令人難以置信。例如他說，「中聯董事長的人事，是我批出去的」，「一定處理到讓你很舒適（平順）」，「現在國庫印章是我在蓋，也是我在管的」，「行政院只有院長、副院長和我在上班，其他人都是我們的幕僚」。聽聽這種口氣，彷彿整個行政院都翻覆在他林益世的股掌之間，一副土皇帝的姿態。馬總統，這人就是你認識的林益世嗎？
林案也暴露了中鋼之類的「官營上市公司」的黑幕不堪聞問。林益世自己辯稱，地勇兩年總工程款才七千多萬元，說他索討一億多元未免「太誇張」；然而，如此誇張的事竟然是確有其事，即可見中鋼已是政治禿鷹的獵場。試想，中鋼還要設「國會連絡人」，這連有些政府單位都沒有的編制，裡面究竟有什麼文章？而中鋼若在本案中確有違失，恐也應有人必須承當法律責任；倘能讓中鋼人員吃上官司，是否反而能成為未來中鋼、中油、台電之類的公司得以拒絕關說的正大光明的理由？
目前因關說案被起訴的立法委員，早超過一個巴掌之多；從關說盜賣砂石、土地違法開發或租售，到為不法客運業者關說或為醫師團體遊說而索取報酬，不一而足。林益世稍早辯稱，他和地勇的關係只是在「服務選民」；但選民服務而索取報酬，那就是把立委的服務商品化、交易化，甚至假藉服務之名壓迫行政部門或公營企業曲解法令，侵害國家利益，以遂行圖利私人之目的。從這個角度看，如何防杜政治人物假藉「服務選民」或「反映民意」之名來圖利自己及他人，正是林益世案所留下的最大課題。
林益世原是國民黨苦心栽培的明日之星，如今證明這是個失敗的實驗。藍營人才庫之捉襟見肘，與馬政府之識人不明，皆因本案而成了重創形象的錐心教訓。唯一值得慶幸的是，這又再度證實，在法治日趨中立嚴謹的今日，任何政治人物，只要紅牌祭出，就必須出場，絕無僥倖可言。畢竟，我們是一個總統犯法與庶民同罪的國家，何況只是一個林益世？
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 3, 2012
Summary: Lin Yi-shi was a rising star painstakingly cultivated by the KMT. Clearly it was a failed experiment. The Blue Camp pool of talent is stretched to the limit. The Ma administration is a poor judge of character. The corruption scandal is a heartbreaking lesson that has battered the image of the party. The only good news is that it has confirmed that the rule of law prevails, and is increasingly even-handed. Any politician who gets a Red Card is out of the game. No ifs, ands, or buts. After all, we are a country in which even a president who breaks the law is subject to the same punishment as a common person, let alone a mere Lin Yi-shi?
Full Text below:
After a night of interrogation, former Executive Yuan Secretary-General Lin Yi-shi was charged with several counts of political corruption. The Special Investigation Unit has detained him. Lin is the youngest ever Vice Chairman of the KMT. He is the Legislative Yuan party whip. He is the Executive Yuan Secretary-General. Lin Yi-shi is the golden boy of the KMT and the Ma administration. He was being groomed for high office. Now he is like a soccer player guilty of a violent foul. He has received a Red Card and has been suspended from the game, permanently. He has been expelled from the stadium. He has been humiliated.
In this particular case, the Special Investigation Unit deserves recognition. On June 27, The Weekly Edition broke the news. The Special Investigation Unit immediately began assigning individual cases. It prevented suspects from leaving the country, issued suspect alerts, obtained arrest and search warrants. On the fourth day it obtained an arrest warrant for Lin Yi-shi. As soon as hearings were concluded, he was held incommunicado.
Legislators and other elected officials have been known to abuse their power and influence. Many Blue and Green camp people are currently serving time. But Lin Yi-shi is an especially bitter disappointment. One. His alleged acts of bribery occurred just after Chen Shui-bian was convicted and imprisoned for political corruption. Public disgust with corruption was especially intense. Yet Lin debase himself anyway. He chose self-destructive greed. Two. President Ma held high the banner of "clean government." Lin Yi-shi occupied key positions within the party and within the administration. He did more than fail to lead by example. He wallowed in degradation. Three. After Lin Yi-shi lost his bid for reelection, he was apppointed Secretary-General of the Cabinet. President Ma trusted him. Now the image of the cabinet has been dealt a sever blow. Even worse, it leaves the impression that the president is a poor judge of character. The result is truly heartbreaking.
Let us examine the ins and outs of the case. Are George Chen's accusations against Lin Yi-shi true? That remains to be determined, by law enforcement and investigative officials. , Earlier this year, George Chen accused Lin Yi-shi of extortion. As a result China Steel Corporation was forced to cease supplying slag for some time. It may be that the Ti Yung Company illegally stored slag. The Kaohsiung Environmental Protection Agency repeatedly fined China Steel and ordered it to stop supplying product. George Chen was unable to obtain the product he neededd. Lin Yi-shi accepted bribes before. Chen expected Lin to help him out. He probably felt that Lin turned his back on him. Chen may have decided to blow the whistle on Lin. He may have decided to use the 63 million dollar bribe Lin accepted previously as leverage against him, even though they would both go down together. The result was a "golden boy" dug his own grave and jumped in it.
From what has been disclosed so far Lin Yi-shi's arrogance was incredible. For example Lin said, "I approved the Vanda CEO appointment." "I will take care of the matter. You will be very pleased with the results." "I'm the one who applies the Treasury Seal. I'm the one in charge of it." "The only ones who come to work at the Executive Yuan are the Premier, Vice Premier, and myself. The others are all my staffers." Listen to his tone. It is as if the entire Executive Yuan was in Lin Yi-shi's hands. This is the attitude of a petty dictator. President Ma, is this the same Lin Yi-shi you know?
The Lin corruption scandal has exposed the dark underbelly of government-run companies such as China Steel. Lin Yi-shi argued that the Ti Yung Company's construction costs exceeded 70 million dollars in two years. He said allegations that he extorted over 100 million dollars from them were "clearly exaggerated." Yet the exaggerated figures turned out to be true. As we can see, China Steel was ripe pickings for government vultures. China Steel even had a "Legislative Liason." What sort of funny business goes on in other government agencies without "Legislative Liasons?" Was China Steel guilty of wrongdoing? If so, someone will have to take the fall. If China Steel personnel are sued, perhaps in the future companies such as China Steel, China Petroleum, and Taipower will have a good excuse to "Just say no" to officials who demand bribes.
More than a few legislators have been indicted recently for demanding bribes. Cases include stealing and selling sand and gravel, illegal land development or rentals, illegal tour bus lines, or physician groups lobbying for compensation. Lin Yi-shi argued that his relationship with Ti Yung was perfectly above board. He was merely "serving his constituents." But his "service to his constituents" included demands for bribes. This commercialized the legislator's "service to his constituents." It turned it into quid pro quo transactions. It dressed up bribery as service to constituents. It twisted the meaning of the "service" provided by government agencies or public enterprises. It harmed the national interest. It abused public resources for the purpose of making a private profit. The biggest problem left over by the Lin corruption scandal is how to prevent politicians from making a private profit from public resources, all under the guise of "serving the constituents" or "reflecting the public will."
Lin Yi-shi was a rising star painstakingly cultivated by the KMT. Clearly it was a failed experiment. The Blue Camp pool of talent is stretched to the limit. The Ma administration is a poor judge of character. The corruption scandal is a heartbreaking lesson that has battered the image of the party. The only good news is that it has confirmed that the rule of law prevails, and is increasingly even-handed. Any politician who gets a Red Card is out of the game. No ifs, ands, or buts. After all, we are a country in which even a president who breaks the law is subject to the same punishment as a common person, let alone a mere Lin Yi-shi?
不可貪汙：紅牌祭出，立即出場！
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.03 01:53 am
經過徹夜偵訊，前行政院祕書長林益世以貪汙罪嫌重大，遭到特偵組聲押獲准。頂著國民黨最年輕副主席、立院大黨鞭、行政院祕書長等光環，林益世一路受到國民黨和馬政府的寵信與提拔；如今，他卻像在足球賽中惡性犯規的球員，紅牌祭出，立即被逐出了球場，狼狽萬狀。
在本案中，特偵組的表現值得肯定。六月二十七日，周刊爆料見刊，特偵組於第一時間立即剪報分案，然後馬上將相關人等限制出境，展開傳訊、拘提、搜索，至第四天即傳至林益世，訊完即聲請收押禁見。
立委或民代濫權關說，時有所聞，藍綠陣營均有多人仍在接受司法審判，而林案卻格外讓人感到痛心疾首，原因是：一，他涉嫌索賄的時段，正在陳水扁貪汙受審入獄之後，社會憎惡貪瀆的氣氛高漲，他卻不知自愛，刀口舔血。二，馬總統高舉「清廉執政」大旗，林益世歷任黨政重要幹部，非但不能以身作則，竟然自甘下流。三，林益世選舉失利後應命出任內閣祕書長要職，顯示馬總統對其的信任；但經過此案，不僅內閣形象受到重創，更暴露總統「昧於知人」，令人扼腕。
觀察來龍去脈，陳啟祥對林益世的種種指控是否全然屬實，仍有待檢調仔細查證。其中，例如陳啟祥指林益世今年初因索賄未遂，因而指使中鋼公司停止對其供應爐渣一節，實情可能是因地勇公司違法堆置爐渣，遭高雄環保局連續開罰並要求中鋼停止對其供貨；而陳啟祥因無法進料，要求曾經收賄的林益世協助關說卻未能如願，認為林翻臉不認人，於是利用前次交付六千三百萬賄款之把柄爆料，不惜與林益世偕亡，而使一個光鮮的「政治金童」就此跳進了自掘的墳墓。
從目前透露的案情中，林益世的言語之狂悖，實在令人難以置信。例如他說，「中聯董事長的人事，是我批出去的」，「一定處理到讓你很舒適（平順）」，「現在國庫印章是我在蓋，也是我在管的」，「行政院只有院長、副院長和我在上班，其他人都是我們的幕僚」。聽聽這種口氣，彷彿整個行政院都翻覆在他林益世的股掌之間，一副土皇帝的姿態。馬總統，這人就是你認識的林益世嗎？
林案也暴露了中鋼之類的「官營上市公司」的黑幕不堪聞問。林益世自己辯稱，地勇兩年總工程款才七千多萬元，說他索討一億多元未免「太誇張」；然而，如此誇張的事竟然是確有其事，即可見中鋼已是政治禿鷹的獵場。試想，中鋼還要設「國會連絡人」，這連有些政府單位都沒有的編制，裡面究竟有什麼文章？而中鋼若在本案中確有違失，恐也應有人必須承當法律責任；倘能讓中鋼人員吃上官司，是否反而能成為未來中鋼、中油、台電之類的公司得以拒絕關說的正大光明的理由？
目前因關說案被起訴的立法委員，早超過一個巴掌之多；從關說盜賣砂石、土地違法開發或租售，到為不法客運業者關說或為醫師團體遊說而索取報酬，不一而足。林益世稍早辯稱，他和地勇的關係只是在「服務選民」；但選民服務而索取報酬，那就是把立委的服務商品化、交易化，甚至假藉服務之名壓迫行政部門或公營企業曲解法令，侵害國家利益，以遂行圖利私人之目的。從這個角度看，如何防杜政治人物假藉「服務選民」或「反映民意」之名來圖利自己及他人，正是林益世案所留下的最大課題。
林益世原是國民黨苦心栽培的明日之星，如今證明這是個失敗的實驗。藍營人才庫之捉襟見肘，與馬政府之識人不明，皆因本案而成了重創形象的錐心教訓。唯一值得慶幸的是，這又再度證實，在法治日趨中立嚴謹的今日，任何政治人物，只要紅牌祭出，就必須出場，絕無僥倖可言。畢竟，我們是一個總統犯法與庶民同罪的國家，何況只是一個林益世？
Monday, July 2, 2012
Partisan Struggles are not Checks and Balances
Partisan Struggles are not Checks and Balances
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 2, 2012
Summary: The biggest obstacles to Taiwan's economic development have always been non-economic factors. This has been true for over 20 years. This is true today. Struggles over reunification vs. independence and cross-Strait confrontation were originally directed outward. But over time, they have unwittingly been redirected inward. They have been internalized as irrational Blue vs. Green struggles. This is the root cause of Taiwan's internal hemorrhaging.
Full Text below:
The biggest obstacles to Taiwan's economic development have always been non-economic factors. This has been true for over 20 years. This is true today. Struggles over reunification vs. independence and cross-Strait confrontation were originally directed outward. But over time, they have unwittingly been redirected inward. They have been internalized as irrational Blue vs. Green struggles. This is the root cause of Taiwan's internal hemorrhaging.
Since the January general election, society has endlessly revolved around three issues. One. U.S. beef imports. Two. The capital gains tax. Three. Gasoline and electricity rate hikes. Back and forth, on and on. Strictly speaking, these three issues are not that divisive. But the ruling and opposition parties and society as a whole have wasted at least six months arguing over them. They have sought neither consensus nor solutions. Under the circumstances, how can Taiwan progress?
Did Taiwan really have nothing more important to do during the past six months? Dealing with landslides and floods, upgrading industry, reviewing an obsolete legal system, have all been victims of long-term neglect. Every one of them is more important than these three. But the ruling and opposition parties would rather bicker over these. Consider the world as a whole. Other nations are preparing for the chain reaction triggered by the European debt crisis. But the ruling and opposition parties on Taiwan don't seem to care. They are not preparing for a rainy day. The water is already up to their knees. Yet no one cares.
During the presidential election Ma spoke of creating a "Golden Decade" on Taiwan. But three issues of only moderate importance have squandered six months of valuable time, with no end in sight. This snails pace is difficult to conceive. When can people witness the political and economic dawn promised by President Ma?
Internal bickering on Taiwan is something the public understands. The problem is different parties interpret the cause and background of the internal bickering in different ways. Personal grudges between ruling and opposition politicians make the differences even harder to resolve. Opposition began years ago, over reunification vs. independence. With democratization this opposition evolved into society-wide Blue vs. Green opposition. Society has both progressed and regressed. This progression and regression is the result of two forces: democracy and national identity. In the early years people placed a higher priority on promoting democracy than on promoting national identity. Therefore society progressed. In recent years, people have placed a higher priority on promoting national identity than on promoting democracy. As a result society has regressed.
The promotion of democracy and freedom has taken place alongside the promotion of "ethnic identity," concurrently or alternately. The dominant force was a desire to promoted progress and democracy. But this also promoted pluralism. It intensified a "Taiwanese consciousness" and a sense of "ethnic identity." The struggle between reunification and independence has hardened into Blue vs. Green social polarization. It has also deprived the public of its enthusiasm for democracy and its rationality. The passion for democratic reform has turned into an obssession with ethnic identity. This is the root of the internal bickering that has left Taiwan mired in conflict and unable to extricate himself.
Blue vs. Green confrontation has led to all sorts of distortions of democracy. For example, the opposition Pan Green parties have euphemistically characterized partisan obstructionism as "constitutional checks and balances." Green camp obstructionism has led to political and institutional paralysis. It has led to the subversion of their own ideas and proposals. Construction on the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant has been repeatedly started and halted. The Kuo Kuang Petrochemical Plant was stillborn. U.S. beef imports have been repeatedly approved and disapproved. Every one of them squandered national resources and tried the industry and public patience. Political parties sacrificed Taiwan's future for their own selfish interests.
An end to such internal bickering, requires a return to rational democratic politics. This requires the ruling and opposition parties to act together. During the Two Critical Years Summit, Hong Chi-chang, former SEF Chairman for the Chen Shui-bian administration, elicited universal applause. He said: "Our political parties must not persist in opposition and confrontation. They must dialogue. They must compete and cooperate." He said, "Taiwan needs a rational, responsible and loyal opposition party. Even more, it needs a ruling party with vision, capacity to govern, and the ability to improve the people's welfare. Only this will allow Taiwan to move forward."
This is precisely right. In a healthy democracy, the relationship between the ruling and opposition parties must not be a zero-sum game. They must engage in coopetition. Only that accords with rational democracy and the national interest. Parties should rely on rationality, wisdom, and benevolence to win public support. They should not resort to whatever means possible to acquire political power. They should not disregard the nation, society, and the public interest. On Taiwan, changes in ruling parties have become the norm. An opposition party that exploits the public cannot win the public trust. A ruling party that is indolent and incompetent cannot remain in office. The public sees this clearly.
The facts cannot be denied. Internal bickering has many layers. They have political, economic, social and psychological impacts. As a result, only great patience and courage can halt this downward spiral. Over the past four years, President Ma has adopted a flexible strategy. He has adopted an inclusive attitude. He has made an heroic effort to defuse the hostility of the Democratic Progressive Party. The response has been disappointing. President Ma failed to win Pan Green camp cooperation. Instead, they have bound him hand and foot. He has even left the public with the impression that he is too weak. As a result the administration's reforms have stalled. It cannot reverse the economic decline. People feel anxious and disappointed. They have lost confidence in their own nation. President Ma must change his way of doing things. He must govern more effectively. He must ensure good governance, in order to turn the tide.
As a national leader and chairman of the ruling party, Ma Ying-jeou must overcome internal bickering. He needs courage. He must act quickly. He must not cling to his strong, silent style. If he cannot pass three bills in six months. he will become a lame duck. Then it will be too late. Then there will be no going back. The ruling party will disintegrate. The executive branch will have nothing to show for its effort. The legacy Ma aspires to will vanish into thin air.
Taiwan is in a race against time. It is in a race against itself. The ruling party must charge ahead. The opposition parties must rid themselves of their delusions about internal bickering. Only then can Taiwan emerge from its quagmire. Only then can Taiwan open itself up economically.
惡鬥不是制衡．內耗拖垮民主．振興需要領導
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.02
台灣經濟發展的最大阻力，向來以「非經濟因素」干擾為首；廿多年來一貫如此，於今尤烈。原因是，從統獨之爭到兩岸對峙原本皆是對外的問題，而如今，卻不知不覺被「內部化」成藍綠的非理性鬥爭。這是導致台灣內傷及欲進不前的致命根源。
最明顯的例子是，元月大選後至今，台灣社會完全只圍繞著三個議題打轉：一是美牛案，二是證所稅，三是油電雙漲，你來我往，無止無休。嚴格而論，這三個議題都稱不上是可以造成決裂的政策，但朝野政黨乃至整個社會卻為此耗掉半年，且不以尋求共識或尋求解決為目的。在這種情況下，台灣還有什麼力氣往前推進？
這半年，台灣沒有更重要的事要做嗎？整山治水、調整產業體質、檢討落後的法制，都是台灣長期疏於經營的工作，無一不比這三者重要；然而，朝野卻寧可在這三件事上歪纏惡鬥。何況，放眼世界，各國都在為歐債危機引發的連鎖效應預作準備，台灣朝野卻似絲毫不以為意；莫說未雨綢繆，實則勢已燃眉，誰來關心？
馬總統大選時標榜要創造台灣的「黃金十年」，如今僅為了三個不大不小的案子，就耗掉全民半年的寶貴光陰，且三案均仍在原地踏步。以這樣的牛步，我們很難想像，民眾要何時才能看到那道馬總統所許諾的政經曙光？
台灣的內耗現象，其實人們早已看得十分清楚；問題在，各方對內耗的成因和背景的解讀差異極大，再加上夾纏朝野或政治人物的個人恩怨，因此難以化解。然而，從早年「統獨」的意識型態對立，到民主改革後演成整個社會的「藍綠」對峙，我們看到的是一條下墜的社會力曲線。這條曲線，是由「民主」和「認同」兩股力量交織而成，早年社會追求民主的力量遠大過認同，因此曲線是往上升的；而近幾年人們在認同上的撕扯大過對民主的追求，整個社會力的曲線於是頹然而下。
亦即，在民主自由與族群認同或平行或交錯的發展過程中，民主進步的渴求曾扮演主導力量，也激發了多元社會力的勃興。但隨著台灣主體意識的強化，族群認同的力量變成主軸，統獨的意識形態角力硬化成社會的藍綠對峙，也奪走了大家民主的熱情和理性。這種從民主改革向族群認同傾斜的發展，正是台灣陷於內耗而難以自拔的根源所在。
在這樣的藍綠對峙下，我們看到了各種扭曲和偽裝的民主。諸如，在野黨將政黨政治的「制衡」上綱為無限杯葛及無謂抗爭，造成政治的空轉和體制的癱瘓，甚至不惜顛覆自己的主張。從核四廠的建建停停、國光石化的胎死腹中、美牛案的反反覆覆，無一不是在虛擲國家資源、虛耗企業和人民的耐性，也是用台灣前途來獻祭政黨的私心。
要打破這樣的內耗危機，就必須回到民主政治的理性軌道，這需要執政黨與在野黨的共同行動。在《關鍵兩年》高峰會上，曾任扁政府海基會董事長的洪奇昌有一段令人擊掌的談話，直指問題核心。他說：「我們的政黨不能再繼續對立和對抗，我們必須對話，必須要競爭和合作。」他還說：「台灣需要一個理性負責的忠誠反對黨，更需要有規劃、有治理能力、為人民創造福祉的執政黨，這樣才能帶領台灣往前走。」
確乎如此！一個健康的民主政治，朝野的關係不應該是零和競爭，而是要有競有合，那才合乎民主理性及國家利益。而雙方的競爭關係，應該表現在以理性、智慧和善意爭取選民的認同，而不是只為了爭奪政權而不擇手段，棄國家、社會、人民的利益於不顧。在台灣，政黨輪替已成為常態，一個以社會為壑的在野黨不可能獲得人民信賴，一個怠惰無能的執政黨也難以持久，人民的眼睛是雪亮的。
不可諱言，台灣內耗的因素層層疊疊，對政治、經濟、社會、心理的影響交互糾葛；也因此，非有極大的耐心和魄力不足以阻止這個下沈螺旋。過去四年，馬總統採取的是柔性策略，希望用包容、自持來化解民進黨的敵意，但效果顯然不佳。馬總統非但未能成功爭取到綠營的合作，反而處處受到掣肘，甚至讓人民覺得他太過軟弱。因而，政府各種改革的欲進不前、經濟頹勢的欲振乏力，都使民眾感到焦慮與失望，甚至對國家喪失信心。這點，意味馬總統必須改變作風，拿出更有效的治理才能，勵精圖治、力挽狂瀾。
身為國家領導人兼執政黨主席，馬英九有絕對的責任要解決台灣的內耗問題，不僅魄力要大，而且行動要快。否則，若繼續其「沉默的魄力」的作風，以半年解決不了三個案子的表現，跛鴨效應恐將一發不可收拾。屆時，執政黨愈發散漫分崩，行政部門無所憑藉，他想望的歷史定位也將成為泡影。
台灣正在和時間賽跑，也在和自己賽跑。執政黨要拿出衝刺的決心，在野黨要擺脫出惡鬥的迷思，台灣才有機會跳出內耗空轉的泥沼，這也是為台灣經濟開路之鑰。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
July 2, 2012
Summary: The biggest obstacles to Taiwan's economic development have always been non-economic factors. This has been true for over 20 years. This is true today. Struggles over reunification vs. independence and cross-Strait confrontation were originally directed outward. But over time, they have unwittingly been redirected inward. They have been internalized as irrational Blue vs. Green struggles. This is the root cause of Taiwan's internal hemorrhaging.
Full Text below:
The biggest obstacles to Taiwan's economic development have always been non-economic factors. This has been true for over 20 years. This is true today. Struggles over reunification vs. independence and cross-Strait confrontation were originally directed outward. But over time, they have unwittingly been redirected inward. They have been internalized as irrational Blue vs. Green struggles. This is the root cause of Taiwan's internal hemorrhaging.
Since the January general election, society has endlessly revolved around three issues. One. U.S. beef imports. Two. The capital gains tax. Three. Gasoline and electricity rate hikes. Back and forth, on and on. Strictly speaking, these three issues are not that divisive. But the ruling and opposition parties and society as a whole have wasted at least six months arguing over them. They have sought neither consensus nor solutions. Under the circumstances, how can Taiwan progress?
Did Taiwan really have nothing more important to do during the past six months? Dealing with landslides and floods, upgrading industry, reviewing an obsolete legal system, have all been victims of long-term neglect. Every one of them is more important than these three. But the ruling and opposition parties would rather bicker over these. Consider the world as a whole. Other nations are preparing for the chain reaction triggered by the European debt crisis. But the ruling and opposition parties on Taiwan don't seem to care. They are not preparing for a rainy day. The water is already up to their knees. Yet no one cares.
During the presidential election Ma spoke of creating a "Golden Decade" on Taiwan. But three issues of only moderate importance have squandered six months of valuable time, with no end in sight. This snails pace is difficult to conceive. When can people witness the political and economic dawn promised by President Ma?
Internal bickering on Taiwan is something the public understands. The problem is different parties interpret the cause and background of the internal bickering in different ways. Personal grudges between ruling and opposition politicians make the differences even harder to resolve. Opposition began years ago, over reunification vs. independence. With democratization this opposition evolved into society-wide Blue vs. Green opposition. Society has both progressed and regressed. This progression and regression is the result of two forces: democracy and national identity. In the early years people placed a higher priority on promoting democracy than on promoting national identity. Therefore society progressed. In recent years, people have placed a higher priority on promoting national identity than on promoting democracy. As a result society has regressed.
The promotion of democracy and freedom has taken place alongside the promotion of "ethnic identity," concurrently or alternately. The dominant force was a desire to promoted progress and democracy. But this also promoted pluralism. It intensified a "Taiwanese consciousness" and a sense of "ethnic identity." The struggle between reunification and independence has hardened into Blue vs. Green social polarization. It has also deprived the public of its enthusiasm for democracy and its rationality. The passion for democratic reform has turned into an obssession with ethnic identity. This is the root of the internal bickering that has left Taiwan mired in conflict and unable to extricate himself.
Blue vs. Green confrontation has led to all sorts of distortions of democracy. For example, the opposition Pan Green parties have euphemistically characterized partisan obstructionism as "constitutional checks and balances." Green camp obstructionism has led to political and institutional paralysis. It has led to the subversion of their own ideas and proposals. Construction on the Number Four Nuclear Power Plant has been repeatedly started and halted. The Kuo Kuang Petrochemical Plant was stillborn. U.S. beef imports have been repeatedly approved and disapproved. Every one of them squandered national resources and tried the industry and public patience. Political parties sacrificed Taiwan's future for their own selfish interests.
An end to such internal bickering, requires a return to rational democratic politics. This requires the ruling and opposition parties to act together. During the Two Critical Years Summit, Hong Chi-chang, former SEF Chairman for the Chen Shui-bian administration, elicited universal applause. He said: "Our political parties must not persist in opposition and confrontation. They must dialogue. They must compete and cooperate." He said, "Taiwan needs a rational, responsible and loyal opposition party. Even more, it needs a ruling party with vision, capacity to govern, and the ability to improve the people's welfare. Only this will allow Taiwan to move forward."
This is precisely right. In a healthy democracy, the relationship between the ruling and opposition parties must not be a zero-sum game. They must engage in coopetition. Only that accords with rational democracy and the national interest. Parties should rely on rationality, wisdom, and benevolence to win public support. They should not resort to whatever means possible to acquire political power. They should not disregard the nation, society, and the public interest. On Taiwan, changes in ruling parties have become the norm. An opposition party that exploits the public cannot win the public trust. A ruling party that is indolent and incompetent cannot remain in office. The public sees this clearly.
The facts cannot be denied. Internal bickering has many layers. They have political, economic, social and psychological impacts. As a result, only great patience and courage can halt this downward spiral. Over the past four years, President Ma has adopted a flexible strategy. He has adopted an inclusive attitude. He has made an heroic effort to defuse the hostility of the Democratic Progressive Party. The response has been disappointing. President Ma failed to win Pan Green camp cooperation. Instead, they have bound him hand and foot. He has even left the public with the impression that he is too weak. As a result the administration's reforms have stalled. It cannot reverse the economic decline. People feel anxious and disappointed. They have lost confidence in their own nation. President Ma must change his way of doing things. He must govern more effectively. He must ensure good governance, in order to turn the tide.
As a national leader and chairman of the ruling party, Ma Ying-jeou must overcome internal bickering. He needs courage. He must act quickly. He must not cling to his strong, silent style. If he cannot pass three bills in six months. he will become a lame duck. Then it will be too late. Then there will be no going back. The ruling party will disintegrate. The executive branch will have nothing to show for its effort. The legacy Ma aspires to will vanish into thin air.
Taiwan is in a race against time. It is in a race against itself. The ruling party must charge ahead. The opposition parties must rid themselves of their delusions about internal bickering. Only then can Taiwan emerge from its quagmire. Only then can Taiwan open itself up economically.
惡鬥不是制衡．內耗拖垮民主．振興需要領導
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.02
台灣經濟發展的最大阻力，向來以「非經濟因素」干擾為首；廿多年來一貫如此，於今尤烈。原因是，從統獨之爭到兩岸對峙原本皆是對外的問題，而如今，卻不知不覺被「內部化」成藍綠的非理性鬥爭。這是導致台灣內傷及欲進不前的致命根源。
最明顯的例子是，元月大選後至今，台灣社會完全只圍繞著三個議題打轉：一是美牛案，二是證所稅，三是油電雙漲，你來我往，無止無休。嚴格而論，這三個議題都稱不上是可以造成決裂的政策，但朝野政黨乃至整個社會卻為此耗掉半年，且不以尋求共識或尋求解決為目的。在這種情況下，台灣還有什麼力氣往前推進？
這半年，台灣沒有更重要的事要做嗎？整山治水、調整產業體質、檢討落後的法制，都是台灣長期疏於經營的工作，無一不比這三者重要；然而，朝野卻寧可在這三件事上歪纏惡鬥。何況，放眼世界，各國都在為歐債危機引發的連鎖效應預作準備，台灣朝野卻似絲毫不以為意；莫說未雨綢繆，實則勢已燃眉，誰來關心？
馬總統大選時標榜要創造台灣的「黃金十年」，如今僅為了三個不大不小的案子，就耗掉全民半年的寶貴光陰，且三案均仍在原地踏步。以這樣的牛步，我們很難想像，民眾要何時才能看到那道馬總統所許諾的政經曙光？
台灣的內耗現象，其實人們早已看得十分清楚；問題在，各方對內耗的成因和背景的解讀差異極大，再加上夾纏朝野或政治人物的個人恩怨，因此難以化解。然而，從早年「統獨」的意識型態對立，到民主改革後演成整個社會的「藍綠」對峙，我們看到的是一條下墜的社會力曲線。這條曲線，是由「民主」和「認同」兩股力量交織而成，早年社會追求民主的力量遠大過認同，因此曲線是往上升的；而近幾年人們在認同上的撕扯大過對民主的追求，整個社會力的曲線於是頹然而下。
亦即，在民主自由與族群認同或平行或交錯的發展過程中，民主進步的渴求曾扮演主導力量，也激發了多元社會力的勃興。但隨著台灣主體意識的強化，族群認同的力量變成主軸，統獨的意識形態角力硬化成社會的藍綠對峙，也奪走了大家民主的熱情和理性。這種從民主改革向族群認同傾斜的發展，正是台灣陷於內耗而難以自拔的根源所在。
在這樣的藍綠對峙下，我們看到了各種扭曲和偽裝的民主。諸如，在野黨將政黨政治的「制衡」上綱為無限杯葛及無謂抗爭，造成政治的空轉和體制的癱瘓，甚至不惜顛覆自己的主張。從核四廠的建建停停、國光石化的胎死腹中、美牛案的反反覆覆，無一不是在虛擲國家資源、虛耗企業和人民的耐性，也是用台灣前途來獻祭政黨的私心。
要打破這樣的內耗危機，就必須回到民主政治的理性軌道，這需要執政黨與在野黨的共同行動。在《關鍵兩年》高峰會上，曾任扁政府海基會董事長的洪奇昌有一段令人擊掌的談話，直指問題核心。他說：「我們的政黨不能再繼續對立和對抗，我們必須對話，必須要競爭和合作。」他還說：「台灣需要一個理性負責的忠誠反對黨，更需要有規劃、有治理能力、為人民創造福祉的執政黨，這樣才能帶領台灣往前走。」
確乎如此！一個健康的民主政治，朝野的關係不應該是零和競爭，而是要有競有合，那才合乎民主理性及國家利益。而雙方的競爭關係，應該表現在以理性、智慧和善意爭取選民的認同，而不是只為了爭奪政權而不擇手段，棄國家、社會、人民的利益於不顧。在台灣，政黨輪替已成為常態，一個以社會為壑的在野黨不可能獲得人民信賴，一個怠惰無能的執政黨也難以持久，人民的眼睛是雪亮的。
不可諱言，台灣內耗的因素層層疊疊，對政治、經濟、社會、心理的影響交互糾葛；也因此，非有極大的耐心和魄力不足以阻止這個下沈螺旋。過去四年，馬總統採取的是柔性策略，希望用包容、自持來化解民進黨的敵意，但效果顯然不佳。馬總統非但未能成功爭取到綠營的合作，反而處處受到掣肘，甚至讓人民覺得他太過軟弱。因而，政府各種改革的欲進不前、經濟頹勢的欲振乏力，都使民眾感到焦慮與失望，甚至對國家喪失信心。這點，意味馬總統必須改變作風，拿出更有效的治理才能，勵精圖治、力挽狂瀾。
身為國家領導人兼執政黨主席，馬英九有絕對的責任要解決台灣的內耗問題，不僅魄力要大，而且行動要快。否則，若繼續其「沉默的魄力」的作風，以半年解決不了三個案子的表現，跛鴨效應恐將一發不可收拾。屆時，執政黨愈發散漫分崩，行政部門無所憑藉，他想望的歷史定位也將成為泡影。
台灣正在和時間賽跑，也在和自己賽跑。執政黨要拿出衝刺的決心，在野黨要擺脫出惡鬥的迷思，台灣才有機會跳出內耗空轉的泥沼，這也是為台灣經濟開路之鑰。
Sunday, July 1, 2012
Battles not checks and balances. Internal friction caused the collapse of democracy. Revitalization will require leadership
United Daily News editorial]
2012.07.02
The biggest obstacle to Taiwan's economic development,
Has always been "non-economic factors that interfere with the US-led;
For over twenty years has always been so,
The today Youlie.
The reason is that the original are external from the unification and independence struggle to cross-strait confrontation,
, But unknowingly be "internalized" into the blue-green of the irrational struggle.
This is the result in Taiwan's internal injuries and want to enter before the fatal root causes.
The most obvious example is
January after the election so far,
Taiwan's society entirely around the three topics of spin:
First, the U.S. beef case,
License tax,
Dual increase of oil and electricity,
You come to me,
Non-stop round.
Strictly speaking,
These three issues can not be called a break policy.
But the ruling and opposition parties and even the society as a whole, but this consume at least six months,
And not to seek consensus or to find a solution for the purpose.
In this case,
Taiwan there are efforts to push ahead?
The past six months, Taiwan does not have more important things to do?
Whole mountain flood,
Adjustment of the industrial body.
Review of the backward legal system,
Taiwan long-term neglect of the work of the operating
Are all important than these three;
However, the ruling and opposition parties would rather Wai Chan battles on these three things.
Moreover, the world
Countries are in a chain reaction triggered by the debt crisis for Europe to prepare for
Taiwan's ruling and opposition parties just like did not mind;
Not to mention a rainy day
But in reality the situation has been pressing,
Who cares?
Ma's presidential election when advertised to create Taiwan's "golden years"
Today, only three medium-intensity case
Consume the full six months of valuable time,
And three cases are still marking time.
To such a snail-paced,
We find it hard to imagine,
When the people you want to see the Road President Ma promised the dawn of political and economic?
The phenomenon of internal friction,
In fact, it has long been very clear;
Problem, the parties to the causes and background of internal friction of the interpretation of differences
Plus clip wrapped around the personal grudges of the ruling and opposition parties or political figures,
It is difficult to resolve.
However, opposition from the early years of "independence" ideology.
Evolves into a society as a whole "blue-green confrontation to democratic reform.
What we see is the curve of a fall in the social forces.
This curve,
Interwoven by the two forces of "democracy" and "identity"
The early years of the social pursuit of the democratic power of ambitious over identity,
Therefore, the curve is moving up;
In recent years, people agree on a tear greater than the pursuit of democracy,
Society as a whole force curve then slumped down.
That is, the development of democracy and freedom and ethnic identity, or parallel or staggered
Desire for progress of democracy has played a dominant force
Also stimulated the flourishing pluralistic society force.
But with the strengthening of Taiwan consciousness,
The strength of ethnic identity into a spindle,
Unification and independence of the ideology of wrestling hardened into a blue-green confrontation of social
Also took all the enthusiasm of democracy and rational.
The democratic reform tilt to the ethnic identity development.
It is trapped in internal friction Taiwan unable to extricate himself lies at the root.
In the blue-green confrontation,
We see all kinds of distortions and camouflage of democracy.
Such as the opposition parties party politics "checks and balances" on the outline for unlimited boycott and unnecessary fight
Idling caused by political and institutional paralysis,
Even at the subversion of its own ideas.
From the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant was built and go,
Kuo Kuang Petrochemical aborted U.S. beef case repeatedly.
Both are in the squandering of national resources,
Wasted enterprises and the patience of the people,
Is the future of Taiwan to sacrifice the selfishness of the political parties.
To break such a crisis of internal friction,
Must return to the rational orbit of democratic politics,
This requires the ruling party and opposition parties to act together.
On the summit of the "critical years",
Former Chen Shui-bian government SEF Chairman of the Hong Qichang clap for some people to talk
Directed at the core of the problem.
He said: "Our party can not continue to antagonism and confrontation,
We must dialogue
Must be competition and cooperation. He added:
"Taiwan needs a rational and responsible for the loyal opposition,
Need more planning,
Capacity to govern,
For the people to create well-being of the ruling party,
This can lead Taiwan to move forward. "
Indeed so!
A healthy democracy,
The relationship between government and the public should not be a zero-sum competition
But should be competing together,
That was in line with the democratic reason and national interest.
Both sides of the competition between
Should behave in a rational,
Wisdom and good fight for the recognition of the voters,
And not only in order to compete for political power, by whatever means,
Abandoned the state, society, the interests of the people to disregard.
In Taiwan, the alternation of political parties has become the norm,
A community to sink the opposition can not get people's trust
Incapable of ruling a laziness is also difficult to sustain,
People's eyes are discerning.
Can not be denied
Layers of the factors of internal friction in Taiwan,
Interaction of political, economic, social and psychological impact of disputes;
As a result, non-great deal of patience and courage are not enough to stop this sinking spiral.
Over the past four years,
President Ma to adopt a flexible strategy,
I hope to use inclusive
Self-restraint to defuse the hostility of the Democratic Progressive Party,
But the results poor.
President Ma not only failed to secure the cooperation of the Pan-
But everywhere hampered
Even let the people think he is too weak.
Thus, the Government's reform desire to enter,
Economic decline are lacking,
Make people feel anxiety and disappointment,
Even loss of confidence in the country.
This means that President Ma must change the style of
Come up with more effective governance in order to,
Good governance,
Turn the tide.
As a national leader and chairman of the ruling,
Ma Ying-jeou has an absolute responsibility to solve the internal friction
Not only the courage to be,
And act fast.
Otherwise, if the continued vigor of "silent" style,
The performance of the case can not be three to six months to resolve.
The lame-duck effect probably will be out of control.
Then, the ruling party increasingly loose to fall apart,
The administrative departments without virtue,
The historical position of his desire to vanish into thin air.
Taiwan is a race against time,
Also, and their own race.
The ruling party to come up with Sprint's determination,
The opposition parties to get rid of the myth of the battles,
Taiwan have a chance to jump out of the morass of spin its wheels,
This is also the key to open Taiwan's economic.
惡鬥不是制衡．內耗拖垮民主．振興需要領導
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.02
台灣經濟發展的最大阻力，向來以「非經濟因素」干擾為首；廿多年來一貫如此，於今尤烈。原因是，從統獨之爭到兩岸對峙原本皆是對外的問題，而如今，卻不知不覺被「內部化」成藍綠的非理性鬥爭。這是導致台灣內傷及欲進不前的致命根源。
最明顯的例子是，元月大選後至今，台灣社會完全只圍繞著三個議題打轉：一是美牛案，二是證所稅，三是油電雙漲，你來我往，無止無休。嚴格而論，這三個議題都稱不上是可以造成決裂的政策，但朝野政黨乃至整個社會卻為此耗掉半年，且不以尋求共識或尋求解決為目的。在這種情況下，台灣還有什麼力氣往前推進？
這半年，台灣沒有更重要的事要做嗎？整山治水、調整產業體質、檢討落後的法制，都是台灣長期疏於經營的工作，無一不比這三者重要；然而，朝野卻寧可在這三件事上歪纏惡鬥。何況，放眼世界，各國都在為歐債危機引發的連鎖效應預作準備，台灣朝野卻似絲毫不以為意；莫說未雨綢繆，實則勢已燃眉，誰來關心？
馬總統大選時標榜要創造台灣的「黃金十年」，如今僅為了三個不大不小的案子，就耗掉全民半年的寶貴光陰，且三案均仍在原地踏步。以這樣的牛步，我們很難想像，民眾要何時才能看到那道馬總統所許諾的政經曙光？
台灣的內耗現象，其實人們早已看得十分清楚；問題在，各方對內耗的成因和背景的解讀差異極大，再加上夾纏朝野或政治人物的個人恩怨，因此難以化解。然而，從早年「統獨」的意識型態對立，到民主改革後演成整個社會的「藍綠」對峙，我們看到的是一條下墜的社會力曲線。這條曲線，是由「民主」和「認同」兩股力量交織而成，早年社會追求民主的力量遠大過認同，因此曲線是往上升的；而近幾年人們在認同上的撕扯大過對民主的追求，整個社會力的曲線於是頹然而下。
亦即，在民主自由與族群認同或平行或交錯的發展過程中，民主進步的渴求曾扮演主導力量，也激發了多元社會力的勃興。但隨著台灣主體意識的強化，族群認同的力量變成主軸，統獨的意識形態角力硬化成社會的藍綠對峙，也奪走了大家民主的熱情和理性。這種從民主改革向族群認同傾斜的發展，正是台灣陷於內耗而難以自拔的根源所在。
在這樣的藍綠對峙下，我們看到了各種扭曲和偽裝的民主。諸如，在野黨將政黨政治的「制衡」上綱為無限杯葛及無謂抗爭，造成政治的空轉和體制的癱瘓，甚至不惜顛覆自己的主張。從核四廠的建建停停、國光石化的胎死腹中、美牛案的反反覆覆，無一不是在虛擲國家資源、虛耗企業和人民的耐性，也是用台灣前途來獻祭政黨的私心。
要打破這樣的內耗危機，就必須回到民主政治的理性軌道，這需要執政黨與在野黨的共同行動。在《關鍵兩年》高峰會上，曾任扁政府海基會董事長的洪奇昌有一段令人擊掌的談話，直指問題核心。他說：「我們的政黨不能再繼續對立和對抗，我們必須對話，必須要競爭和合作。」他還說：「台灣需要一個理性負責的忠誠反對黨，更需要有規劃、有治理能力、為人民創造福祉的執政黨，這樣才能帶領台灣往前走。」
確乎如此！一個健康的民主政治，朝野的關係不應該是零和競爭，而是要有競有合，那才合乎民主理性及國家利益。而雙方的競爭關係，應該表現在以理性、智慧和善意爭取選民的認同，而不是只為了爭奪政權而不擇手段，棄國家、社會、人民的利益於不顧。在台灣，政黨輪替已成為常態，一個以社會為壑的在野黨不可能獲得人民信賴，一個怠惰無能的執政黨也難以持久，人民的眼睛是雪亮的。
不可諱言，台灣內耗的因素層層疊疊，對政治、經濟、社會、心理的影響交互糾葛；也因此，非有極大的耐心和魄力不足以阻止這個下沈螺旋。過去四年，馬總統採取的是柔性策略，希望用包容、自持來化解民進黨的敵意，但效果顯然不佳。馬總統非但未能成功爭取到綠營的合作，反而處處受到掣肘，甚至讓人民覺得他太過軟弱。因而，政府各種改革的欲進不前、經濟頹勢的欲振乏力，都使民眾感到焦慮與失望，甚至對國家喪失信心。這點，意味馬總統必須改變作風，拿出更有效的治理才能，勵精圖治、力挽狂瀾。
身為國家領導人兼執政黨主席，馬英九有絕對的責任要解決台灣的內耗問題，不僅魄力要大，而且行動要快。否則，若繼續其「沉默的魄力」的作風，以半年解決不了三個案子的表現，跛鴨效應恐將一發不可收拾。屆時，執政黨愈發散漫分崩，行政部門無所憑藉，他想望的歷史定位也將成為泡影。
台灣正在和時間賽跑，也在和自己賽跑。執政黨要拿出衝刺的決心，在野黨要擺脫出惡鬥的迷思，台灣才有機會跳出內耗空轉的泥沼，這也是為台灣經濟開路之鑰。
United Daily News editorial]
2012.07.02
The biggest obstacle to Taiwan's economic development,
Has always been "non-economic factors that interfere with the US-led;
For over twenty years has always been so,
The today Youlie.
The reason is that the original are external from the unification and independence struggle to cross-strait confrontation,
, But unknowingly be "internalized" into the blue-green of the irrational struggle.
This is the result in Taiwan's internal injuries and want to enter before the fatal root causes.
The most obvious example is
January after the election so far,
Taiwan's society entirely around the three topics of spin:
First, the U.S. beef case,
License tax,
Dual increase of oil and electricity,
You come to me,
Non-stop round.
Strictly speaking,
These three issues can not be called a break policy.
But the ruling and opposition parties and even the society as a whole, but this consume at least six months,
And not to seek consensus or to find a solution for the purpose.
In this case,
Taiwan there are efforts to push ahead?
The past six months, Taiwan does not have more important things to do?
Whole mountain flood,
Adjustment of the industrial body.
Review of the backward legal system,
Taiwan long-term neglect of the work of the operating
Are all important than these three;
However, the ruling and opposition parties would rather Wai Chan battles on these three things.
Moreover, the world
Countries are in a chain reaction triggered by the debt crisis for Europe to prepare for
Taiwan's ruling and opposition parties just like did not mind;
Not to mention a rainy day
But in reality the situation has been pressing,
Who cares?
Ma's presidential election when advertised to create Taiwan's "golden years"
Today, only three medium-intensity case
Consume the full six months of valuable time,
And three cases are still marking time.
To such a snail-paced,
We find it hard to imagine,
When the people you want to see the Road President Ma promised the dawn of political and economic?
The phenomenon of internal friction,
In fact, it has long been very clear;
Problem, the parties to the causes and background of internal friction of the interpretation of differences
Plus clip wrapped around the personal grudges of the ruling and opposition parties or political figures,
It is difficult to resolve.
However, opposition from the early years of "independence" ideology.
Evolves into a society as a whole "blue-green confrontation to democratic reform.
What we see is the curve of a fall in the social forces.
This curve,
Interwoven by the two forces of "democracy" and "identity"
The early years of the social pursuit of the democratic power of ambitious over identity,
Therefore, the curve is moving up;
In recent years, people agree on a tear greater than the pursuit of democracy,
Society as a whole force curve then slumped down.
That is, the development of democracy and freedom and ethnic identity, or parallel or staggered
Desire for progress of democracy has played a dominant force
Also stimulated the flourishing pluralistic society force.
But with the strengthening of Taiwan consciousness,
The strength of ethnic identity into a spindle,
Unification and independence of the ideology of wrestling hardened into a blue-green confrontation of social
Also took all the enthusiasm of democracy and rational.
The democratic reform tilt to the ethnic identity development.
It is trapped in internal friction Taiwan unable to extricate himself lies at the root.
In the blue-green confrontation,
We see all kinds of distortions and camouflage of democracy.
Such as the opposition parties party politics "checks and balances" on the outline for unlimited boycott and unnecessary fight
Idling caused by political and institutional paralysis,
Even at the subversion of its own ideas.
From the construction of the fourth nuclear power plant was built and go,
Kuo Kuang Petrochemical aborted U.S. beef case repeatedly.
Both are in the squandering of national resources,
Wasted enterprises and the patience of the people,
Is the future of Taiwan to sacrifice the selfishness of the political parties.
To break such a crisis of internal friction,
Must return to the rational orbit of democratic politics,
This requires the ruling party and opposition parties to act together.
On the summit of the "critical years",
Former Chen Shui-bian government SEF Chairman of the Hong Qichang clap for some people to talk
Directed at the core of the problem.
He said: "Our party can not continue to antagonism and confrontation,
We must dialogue
Must be competition and cooperation. He added:
"Taiwan needs a rational and responsible for the loyal opposition,
Need more planning,
Capacity to govern,
For the people to create well-being of the ruling party,
This can lead Taiwan to move forward. "
Indeed so!
A healthy democracy,
The relationship between government and the public should not be a zero-sum competition
But should be competing together,
That was in line with the democratic reason and national interest.
Both sides of the competition between
Should behave in a rational,
Wisdom and good fight for the recognition of the voters,
And not only in order to compete for political power, by whatever means,
Abandoned the state, society, the interests of the people to disregard.
In Taiwan, the alternation of political parties has become the norm,
A community to sink the opposition can not get people's trust
Incapable of ruling a laziness is also difficult to sustain,
People's eyes are discerning.
Can not be denied
Layers of the factors of internal friction in Taiwan,
Interaction of political, economic, social and psychological impact of disputes;
As a result, non-great deal of patience and courage are not enough to stop this sinking spiral.
Over the past four years,
President Ma to adopt a flexible strategy,
I hope to use inclusive
Self-restraint to defuse the hostility of the Democratic Progressive Party,
But the results poor.
President Ma not only failed to secure the cooperation of the Pan-
But everywhere hampered
Even let the people think he is too weak.
Thus, the Government's reform desire to enter,
Economic decline are lacking,
Make people feel anxiety and disappointment,
Even loss of confidence in the country.
This means that President Ma must change the style of
Come up with more effective governance in order to,
Good governance,
Turn the tide.
As a national leader and chairman of the ruling,
Ma Ying-jeou has an absolute responsibility to solve the internal friction
Not only the courage to be,
And act fast.
Otherwise, if the continued vigor of "silent" style,
The performance of the case can not be three to six months to resolve.
The lame-duck effect probably will be out of control.
Then, the ruling party increasingly loose to fall apart,
The administrative departments without virtue,
The historical position of his desire to vanish into thin air.
Taiwan is a race against time,
Also, and their own race.
The ruling party to come up with Sprint's determination,
The opposition parties to get rid of the myth of the battles,
Taiwan have a chance to jump out of the morass of spin its wheels,
This is also the key to open Taiwan's economic.
惡鬥不是制衡．內耗拖垮民主．振興需要領導
【聯合報╱社論】
2012.07.02
台灣經濟發展的最大阻力，向來以「非經濟因素」干擾為首；廿多年來一貫如此，於今尤烈。原因是，從統獨之爭到兩岸對峙原本皆是對外的問題，而如今，卻不知不覺被「內部化」成藍綠的非理性鬥爭。這是導致台灣內傷及欲進不前的致命根源。
最明顯的例子是，元月大選後至今，台灣社會完全只圍繞著三個議題打轉：一是美牛案，二是證所稅，三是油電雙漲，你來我往，無止無休。嚴格而論，這三個議題都稱不上是可以造成決裂的政策，但朝野政黨乃至整個社會卻為此耗掉半年，且不以尋求共識或尋求解決為目的。在這種情況下，台灣還有什麼力氣往前推進？
這半年，台灣沒有更重要的事要做嗎？整山治水、調整產業體質、檢討落後的法制，都是台灣長期疏於經營的工作，無一不比這三者重要；然而，朝野卻寧可在這三件事上歪纏惡鬥。何況，放眼世界，各國都在為歐債危機引發的連鎖效應預作準備，台灣朝野卻似絲毫不以為意；莫說未雨綢繆，實則勢已燃眉，誰來關心？
馬總統大選時標榜要創造台灣的「黃金十年」，如今僅為了三個不大不小的案子，就耗掉全民半年的寶貴光陰，且三案均仍在原地踏步。以這樣的牛步，我們很難想像，民眾要何時才能看到那道馬總統所許諾的政經曙光？
台灣的內耗現象，其實人們早已看得十分清楚；問題在，各方對內耗的成因和背景的解讀差異極大，再加上夾纏朝野或政治人物的個人恩怨，因此難以化解。然而，從早年「統獨」的意識型態對立，到民主改革後演成整個社會的「藍綠」對峙，我們看到的是一條下墜的社會力曲線。這條曲線，是由「民主」和「認同」兩股力量交織而成，早年社會追求民主的力量遠大過認同，因此曲線是往上升的；而近幾年人們在認同上的撕扯大過對民主的追求，整個社會力的曲線於是頹然而下。
亦即，在民主自由與族群認同或平行或交錯的發展過程中，民主進步的渴求曾扮演主導力量，也激發了多元社會力的勃興。但隨著台灣主體意識的強化，族群認同的力量變成主軸，統獨的意識形態角力硬化成社會的藍綠對峙，也奪走了大家民主的熱情和理性。這種從民主改革向族群認同傾斜的發展，正是台灣陷於內耗而難以自拔的根源所在。
在這樣的藍綠對峙下，我們看到了各種扭曲和偽裝的民主。諸如，在野黨將政黨政治的「制衡」上綱為無限杯葛及無謂抗爭，造成政治的空轉和體制的癱瘓，甚至不惜顛覆自己的主張。從核四廠的建建停停、國光石化的胎死腹中、美牛案的反反覆覆，無一不是在虛擲國家資源、虛耗企業和人民的耐性，也是用台灣前途來獻祭政黨的私心。
要打破這樣的內耗危機，就必須回到民主政治的理性軌道，這需要執政黨與在野黨的共同行動。在《關鍵兩年》高峰會上，曾任扁政府海基會董事長的洪奇昌有一段令人擊掌的談話，直指問題核心。他說：「我們的政黨不能再繼續對立和對抗，我們必須對話，必須要競爭和合作。」他還說：「台灣需要一個理性負責的忠誠反對黨，更需要有規劃、有治理能力、為人民創造福祉的執政黨，這樣才能帶領台灣往前走。」
確乎如此！一個健康的民主政治，朝野的關係不應該是零和競爭，而是要有競有合，那才合乎民主理性及國家利益。而雙方的競爭關係，應該表現在以理性、智慧和善意爭取選民的認同，而不是只為了爭奪政權而不擇手段，棄國家、社會、人民的利益於不顧。在台灣，政黨輪替已成為常態，一個以社會為壑的在野黨不可能獲得人民信賴，一個怠惰無能的執政黨也難以持久，人民的眼睛是雪亮的。
不可諱言，台灣內耗的因素層層疊疊，對政治、經濟、社會、心理的影響交互糾葛；也因此，非有極大的耐心和魄力不足以阻止這個下沈螺旋。過去四年，馬總統採取的是柔性策略，希望用包容、自持來化解民進黨的敵意，但效果顯然不佳。馬總統非但未能成功爭取到綠營的合作，反而處處受到掣肘，甚至讓人民覺得他太過軟弱。因而，政府各種改革的欲進不前、經濟頹勢的欲振乏力，都使民眾感到焦慮與失望，甚至對國家喪失信心。這點，意味馬總統必須改變作風，拿出更有效的治理才能，勵精圖治、力挽狂瀾。
身為國家領導人兼執政黨主席，馬英九有絕對的責任要解決台灣的內耗問題，不僅魄力要大，而且行動要快。否則，若繼續其「沉默的魄力」的作風，以半年解決不了三個案子的表現，跛鴨效應恐將一發不可收拾。屆時，執政黨愈發散漫分崩，行政部門無所憑藉，他想望的歷史定位也將成為泡影。
台灣正在和時間賽跑，也在和自己賽跑。執政黨要拿出衝刺的決心，在野黨要擺脫出惡鬥的迷思，台灣才有機會跳出內耗空轉的泥沼，這也是為台灣經濟開路之鑰。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)