The DPP Must Not Play Taiwan Independence Tricks
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 10, 2014
Summary: Circuses often offer the spinning plate trick. Jugglers spin a number of plates on top of bamboo poles. The trick requires a great deal of practice. The Democratic Progressive Party has its own spinning plate trick. It is a dangerous trick, rife with perils. Yesterday the DPP was supposed to issue a "Cross-Strait Policy Summary Report." Instead, the report was demoted to a "Cross-Strait Policy Review Minutes." In other words, the DPP's spinning plates came crashing to the floor.
Full text below:
Circuses often offer the spinning plate trick. Jugglers spin a number of plates on top of bamboo poles. The trick requires a great deal of practice. The Democratic Progressive Party has its own spinning plate trick. It is a dangerous trick, rife with perils. Yesterday the DPP was supposed to issue a "Cross-Strait Policy Summary Report." Instead, the report was demoted to a "Cross-Strait Policy Review Minutes." In other words, the DPP's spinning plates came crashing to the floor.
The DPP's Taiwan independence spinning plates trick used three plates. The first plate was "freezing Taiwan independence." Ker Chien-ming proposed "freezing Taiwan independence." Lin Cho-shui speculates that Ker Chien-ming coordinated with Beijing and the DPP before making the proposal. Beijing's Taiwan Affairs Office heaped high praise on Ker Chien-ming, saying that "someone in the know issued an urgent message." Su Tseng-chang said "Freezing the Taiwan independence party platform is not on the agenda." Tsai Ing-wen said "I am unaware of its source." Lin said Su's remarks and Tsai's remarks were evidence of advance coordination. Ker Chien-ming has never been a standard-bearer for DPP ideology. He is a pragmatist whose first concern is making political deals. His "freeze Taiwan independence" showed Beijing the DPP's asking cross-strait policy asking price. From this day forward, the DPP's cross-strait policy asking price can never be any higher. "Freezing Taiwan independence" is its most recent asking price. The asking price can only fall. It can never again rise.
The second plate was yesterday's newly issued "Cross-Strait Policy Review Minutes." The original draft of this [Mainland] China Policy called for "DPP dialogue with the CCP based on a constitutional consensus." But Beijing's State Council Taiwan Affairs Office said beforehand that "The term constitutional consensus blurs Taiwan independence advocacy, therefore it is unacceptable." In other words, a Mainland policy involving a "constitutional consensus" was clearly unacceptable to Beijing. The DPP deliberately ran headlong into a brick wall. Is this sort of call to arms really the DPP's Mainland policy? Such a Mainland policy cannot compete with Ker Chien-ming's "freezing Taiwan independence" proposal. Nor can it compete with Frank Hsieh's "constitutional one China" proposal. As a result, the term "constitutional consensus" vanished without a trace from the minutes, leaving only the "next phase discussions."
The third plate was the trade in services agreement. In cross-strait policy, political and economic considerations must be coordinated. Put bluntly, advocating Taiwan independence means opposition to the trade in services agreement. If one has decided that one "cannot turn the clock back and promote Taiwan independence," then there is no reason to oppose this version of the trade in services agreement. Yet Ker Chien-ming has obstructed passage of the trade in services agreement in the legislature, even as he called for freezing Taiwan independence outside the legislature. Ker Chien-ming contradicts himself on cross-strait policy. He reflects the contradictions in the DPP's cross-strait policy.
The DPP currently advocates a cross-strait policy that Beijing openly refers to as "fuzzy Taiwan independence." Some insiders advocate "freezing Taiwan independence" even as the party maliciously obstructs a win/win cross-Strait trade in services agreement. The DPP failed at its spinning plates trick. It is sure to end up picking broken plates off the floor in panic.
Ker Chien-ming has already announced a low asking price. If the DPP wants to join the cross-strait bidding war, the minimum bid must be "Freezing Taiwan independence." The DPP can no longer trot out its 1999 "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." It has already replaced the 1991 "Taiwan independence party platform." According to the DPP's own logic, the 2007 "Resolution for a Normal Nation" has already replaced the 1999 "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." The Chen government's Taiwan independence antics between 2000 and 2008 already shredded the " Resolution on Taiwan's Future." The "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" expressly advocates "abandoning the one China principle," or what is currently referred to as the "one China framework." It was rejected by Beijing long ago. That path is a dead end. The "constitutional consensus" remains a "fuzzy concept." Its sole purpose was to enable the DPP to dodge the "different constitutional interpretations" and "constitutional one China" concepts. The "Review of the Minutes" proposed exchanges with local governments and think tanks. In fact, Chen Chu, Su Chih-fen, Lai Ching-teh have already visited the Mainland or Hong Kong. This proposal is already behind the curve, politically speaking. On the one hand the DPP insists it wants to create a "friendly environment" for Mainland spouses, Mainland students, and Mainland tourists. On the other hand, it maliciously obstructs the trade in services agreement. Is this not a contradiction? As we can see, the "Review of the Minutes" is nothing more than an unpresentable pile of broken plates.
As the above shows, Ker Chien-ming's call for "freezing Taiwan independence" is now the DPP's cross-strait asking price. Lin Cho-shui already realizes what has happened. He warned Ker Chien-ming that the next step after "Freezing Taiwan independence" will the "one China framework." Lin Cho-shui is right. The DPP is afraid to advocate Taiwan independence. (It makes no difference whether the DPP says it has replaced Taiwan independence with something else, or has "frozen" it. The DPP is also unwilling to return to the "one China framework." But it must return to the "one China framework under a one China Constitution." It cannot repudiate the "one China Constitution." It must uphold in the dignity and interests of the Republic of China's "one China framework."
The DPP must not attempt the Taiwan independence plate spinning trick. It must eventually return to the "one China framework under the ROC Constitution." This must be the DPP's next step. It has no other way out.
民進黨不可在台獨議題上耍盤子
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.01.10 04:25 am
馬戲團裡數隻竹枝耍起幾個盤子的功夫，那是叔叔有練過。現在，民進黨在台獨議題上也玩起耍盤子的戲法，卻是險象環生，危機四伏；原定昨日發布的《兩岸政策總結報告》，降格為《兩岸政策檢討紀要》，正是一隻盤子乒乓落地。
這場台獨戲法有三隻盤子，第一隻是凍獨。林濁水推測，柯建銘在提出凍獨方案前，已與北京和黨內要角套過招。證諸國台辦以「有識之士的積極信號」盛譽柯建銘，及蘇貞昌的「沒有凍不凍的問題」，與蔡英文的「尚不清楚其脈絡」，皆露出套招的痕跡。柯建銘從來不是民進黨內意識形態的旗手，而是主持政治交易的實務派；如今，他以「凍獨」喊出了民進黨兩岸政策的「破盤價」，此後民進黨在兩岸政策上的價碼已不可能高過這個標準，「凍獨」已是最新的公告牌價。價錢只會再跌，無可能回漲。
第二隻盤子是昨天發表的《兩岸政策檢討紀要》。「對中政策」的原來稿本主張，「以憲政共識為民進黨與共產黨對話基礎」；但是，國台辦已有言在先：「憲政共識是模糊的台獨主張，不可能接受。」也就是說，這樣的「對中政策」，儼然是明明頂著「中國不能接受」的「憲政共識」，擺明了偏偏就是要「推車撞壁」，這種宣戰檄文難道真的就是民進黨的「對中政策」嗎？這種「對中政策」不但價碼較柯建銘的凍獨案沒有競爭力，賣相也不如謝長廷的「憲法各表」；因此，「憲政共識」四字遂從《檢討紀要》中消失，留待「下一階段討論」。
第三隻盤子是《服貿協議》。在兩岸政策上，必須政治與經濟協調。直白而言，若主張台獨，就應反對或杯葛服貿協議；若是「不再回頭搞台獨」，就沒有理由反對現在這個版本的服貿協議。但是，如今柯建銘一面在立法院內封殺服貿協議，另一方面卻又在立法院外倡議凍獨；柯建銘在兩岸政策上的矛盾，正是反映了整個民進黨在兩岸政策上的矛盾。
此時此刻的民進黨，在兩岸政策上，擎著北京明指其為「模糊台獨」的「對中政策」大旗，內部則演出「凍獨」的跳樓大拍賣，卻又惡劣抵制促成兩岸經貿雙贏的服貿協議。叔叔沒練過，這個耍盤子戲法，勢必要演成滿地撿破盤子的狼狽下場。
柯建銘已喊出破「盤」價，民進黨要加入兩岸弈局，基本消費額就是「凍獨」。民進黨不能說一九九九年的《台灣前途決議文》已經「取代」了一九九一的《台獨黨綱》，因為，若依此說，二○○七的《正常國家決議文》也已「取代」了一九九九的《台灣前途決議文》，何況二○○○至二○○八扁政府的台獨操作已經完全撕毀了《台灣前途決議文》。尤其，《台灣前途決議文》明文主張「揚棄一中原則」（今日語彙稱「一中架構」），早為北京所拒絕，已然宣告此路不通。至於「憲政共識」，更是一個「模糊的概念」，只是徒然益加彰顯了民進黨是在迴避「憲法各表」與「憲法一中」。再者，《檢討紀要》主張地方政府交流及智庫交流，其實陳菊、蘇治芬、賴清德皆已訪陸或訪港，可見此一主張已遠遠落在政治現實之後；而一方面謂將營造對於陸配、陸生、陸客的「友善環境」，另一方面卻又在《服貿協議》死纏惡鬥，這豈不是自相矛盾？在在可見，這一本《檢討紀要》，其實是滿地的碎盤子，端不上檯面。
前文已論，柯建銘喊出「凍獨」，這是民進黨在兩岸餐桌上的基本消費額。林濁水已看出底細，警告柯建銘，「凍獨」的「下一步」就是「一中架構」。林濁水沒錯，因為，民進黨不可能一方面不敢主張台獨（無論說是被取代或凍結），另一方面卻又不願回到「一中架構」。如今若是主張「台獨被取代」或「台獨被凍結」，即須回到「一中憲法下的一中架構」；亦即，不可否定「一中憲法」，但應堅持中華民國在「一中架構」中的尊嚴與利益。
民進黨在台獨議題上不可耍盤子，終究必須回到「中華民國憲法的一中架構」之下。這必然是民進黨的「下一步」，捨此無路可走。
Thursday, January 9, 2014
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
TPP and RCEP Membership Requires Comprehensive Planning
TPP and RCEP Membership Requires Comprehensive Planning
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 9, 2014
Summary: The Shanghai Free Trade Zone is a means by which the Chinese mainland can join the TPP. On January 6 the Mainland took another step, and allowed in seven value-added telecommunications services. The Mainland's cross-Strait trade in services agreement was supposed to give Taiwan special e-commerce treatment. Instead, these have been given to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone. Political disputes made Taiwan miss a golden opportunity. It must now catch up. It must pass the agreement as soon as possible. It must accelerate the process of trade liberalization and integration into the Asian-Pacific regional economy. Taiwan's industrial competitiveness risks disintegration.
Full text below:
The Shanghai Free Trade Zone is a means by which the Chinese mainland can join the TPP. On January 6 the Mainland took another step, and allowed in seven value-added telecommunications services. The Mainland's cross-Strait trade in services agreement was supposed to give Taiwan special e-commerce treatment. Instead, these have been given to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone. Political disputes made Taiwan miss a golden opportunity. It must now catch up. It must pass the agreement as soon as possible. It must accelerate the process of trade liberalization and integration into the Asian-Pacific regional economy. Taiwan's industrial competitiveness risks disintegration.
The United States is willing to allow the Chinese mainland to take part in TPP negotiations. The Mainland has yet to officially respond. It is promoting the ASEAN Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) negotiations while it keeps an eye on TPP negotiations . The Shanghai Free Trade Zone went into effect last September. Since then the Mainland has aggressively used FTAs to achieve a new wave of trade liberalization. Its goal was obvious, and the results have been substantitive.
According to news reports, late last November the Shanghai Free Trade Zone Trade and Industry Department admitted 1,733 new companies. These funded 1675 new enterprises. Total registered capital approached 40 billion RMB. As we can see, the Shanghai Free Trade Zone has attracted considerable domestic capital. It has inspired the establishment of free trade zones in the Tianjin Binhai New Area, Guangdong, Hong Kong, and Macau Free Trade Zone, the Zhejiang Zhoushan area, Chongqing Two Rivers area, Hebei Caofeidian area, and Fujian Pingtan area.
The Chinese mainland is using free trade zones as a means of liberalization. It is loosening regulations to attract private capital and a foreign presence. This achieves its goal of promoting investment. This also enables it to meet regional trade agreement liberalization requirements.
More importantly, Mainland China's accession to WTO constitutes its first wave of trade liberalization and integration with the global economy. Economic liberalization has enabled the Mainland to enjoy a decade of rapid growth. The Mainland has successfully transitioned from an agriculturally-based economy to an industrially-based economy. The Shanghai Free Trade Zone also explores ways of gradually transitioning from an industrially-based economy to a service-based industry. The Mainland is moving in the same direction as the developed economies. Taiwan must pay attention to the Mainland's development and seize whatever opportunities present themselves.
The TPP and RCEP are two forces for Asian-Pacific regional economic integration, and a new wave of Chinese mainland industrial restructuring. Taiwan has no time to waste. It must ride the wave of Asian-Pacific economic integration as soon as possible. It must take concrete steps to ensure Taiwan's accession the RCEP and TPP.
Taiwan may wish to join the RCEP or the TPP. If so, it must acknowledge the role of the Mainland. The Mainland is Taiwan's largest trading partner. Taiwan must sign the Cross-Strait Trade in Services Agreement and the Cross-Strait Trade in Goods Agreement, as soon as possible. These will help Taiwan's integration into the Asia-Pacific regional economy. They will reduce the impact of the FTA between Mainland China and Korea on Taiwan's economy.
Taiwan must take advantage of cross-Strait economic cooperation, as soon as possible. It must seek ways to integrate the two sides in the global economy and the East Asian regional economy. Mainland China has yet to join the TPP. Taiwan seeks early accession to the TPP. To improve its chances, Taiwan must understand the Mainland's reasons for joining the TPP. It must adjust its timetable for joining the TPP. It must realize its chances for joining may change.
Secondly, taking part in regional economic integration requires putting industry interests first. The TPP is a new style, high-standard regional trade agreement. Industry as a whole will benefit. But Taiwan must consider the impact on agriculture and traditional industries. It must provide concrete policy plans for industrial transformation.
Take the Taiwan-US Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA). The most difficult issue during negotiations was U.S. beef imports. Was Taiwan ready for the impact? Are producers of other sensitive agricultural products prepared to expand production in order to make the pie bigger? Take intellectual property. The TPP may require term extensions for patent medicines. This may increase health care costs. Are coping strategies in place? The government must communicate with industry before joining. It must mitigate the impact on industry. We believe TPP will enhance the efficiency of Taiwan's economy .
Taiwan must pay attention to Mainland Chinese dynamics. It must maintain good communications. The Mainland has already joined the RCEP. We must promote Taiwan's accession as soon as possible, before the RCEP completes negotiations in 2015. We must get a firm handle on RCEP negotiations once they are completed in 2015. We must explain the role of our foreign economic partners to the public. We must seek to maximize public support, and minimize opposition political pressure. We must also propose a comprehensive domestic industrial policy plan, on several tracks at the same time. We must sign regional trade agreements to improve the domestic economy. Only then can we achieve early integration into the new Asian-Pacific regional economy.
社論－加入TPP及RCEP政府需全面布局
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年01月09日 04:09
可視為中國大陸加入TPP試點的上海自由貿易區，於1月6日進一步開放7項增值電信業務，將大陸在《兩岸服務貿易協議》中開放給台灣的電子商務優惠，先給了上海自貿區，台灣因政治爭議錯失了一次大好機會，若再不急起直追，盡速通過協議，並加速經貿自由化進程以融入亞太區域經濟整合，台灣產業競爭優勢可能有崩解之虞。
美國已表示願意邀請中國大陸加入TPP談判，大陸雖然尚未正式回應，但在積極推動參與東協區域全面經濟夥伴關係（RCEP）談判同時，始終重視並追蹤TPP談判的進展。事實上，我們從上海自貿區去年9月底掛牌啟動後的運作可以看出，大陸積極利用自貿區試點達成新一波經貿自由化的目的相當明顯，且已收到實質成效。
報載上海自貿區截至去年11月底，工商部門已辦新設企業共計1733家，其中內資新設企業1675家，註冊資本額近400億元，可看出上海自貿區的開放措施吸引許多內資入駐，也因此引起天津濱海新區、粵港澳自貿區、浙江舟山、重慶兩江、河北曹妃甸、福建平潭等地區對於成立自由貿易區的興趣。
中國大陸藉由自由貿易區各試點所進行的開放措施，以鬆綁法規方式吸引民間資金及外資進駐投資，不但達成促進投資之目的，亦符合全球經貿自由化下，積極洽談的區域貿易協定自由化要求。
更重要的是，中國大陸加入WTO做為第一波與全球經貿自由化接軌以來，已使大陸坐享十年經貿自由化所帶來的快速成長果實，並將大陸產業結構成功地從農業為主轉為工業為主。此次藉由推動上海自貿區進行試點，進一步試探大陸從工業為主的產業結構型態，逐漸轉為以服務業為主要產業型態，朝向已開發經濟體看齊的方向前進，值得台灣關注其發展，並掌握商機。
面對TPP及RCEP兩股亞太區域經濟整合的力道，以及中國大陸新一波產業結構調整，台灣實無時間繼續蹉跎，必須盡速全力融入新一波亞太經濟整合態勢之中，以具體行動，雙軌推動台灣加入RCEP及TPP。
首先，無論台灣想要加入RCEP或是TPP，都必須正視中國大陸的角色。大陸是台灣第一大貿易夥伴，盡速完成《兩岸服務貿易協議》之生效，以及海峽兩岸貨品貿易協議之簽署，將有利於台灣融入亞太區域經濟整合，並減緩「中」韓FTA對於台灣經濟之衝擊。
此外，台灣應該盡速利用兩岸經濟合作，尋求兩岸共同融入全球及東亞區域經濟整合的途徑。面對中國大陸尚未加入TPP的事實，為提高台灣盡早加入TPP之機率，台灣應積極掌握大陸加入TPP之意願，隨時修正台灣加入TPP的時程及機率。
其次，加入區域經濟整合，仍要以產業利益為先。面對TPP為新型態高標準的區域貿易協定，雖然整體產業會因而受益，然而台灣仍應重視農業及部分傳統產業所受到的衝擊，提出產業轉型的具體政策規畫。
舉例而言，台美貿易暨投資架構協議（TIFA）談判時最為棘手的美牛開放，台灣是否已準備好對策？對於其他敏感性農產品是否已經做好藉由引進產品擴大加工製造、把餅做大的準備？智慧財產權部分，面對TPP可能要求原廠藥延長專利期限所可能提高的健保成本，是否已經有因應對策？政府若能在加入之前，與產業做好充分溝通，減緩產業衝擊，相信更能提高加入TPP對於台灣經濟的效益。
台灣應關注中國大陸的動態，並與之做好溝通。對於大陸已加入的RCEP，應盡速於2015年RCEP完成談判前，推動台灣加入，並掌握2015年RCEP談判完成後，外圍經濟夥伴參與條款之發展，對內應充分溝通，爭取最大化民意支持力度，減輕反對黨的政治壓力，同時提出完整的國內產業政策規畫，多軌進行，才能提高簽署區域貿易協定對國內經濟之效能，真正達成盡早融入新一波亞太區域經濟整合的目的。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 9, 2014
Summary: The Shanghai Free Trade Zone is a means by which the Chinese mainland can join the TPP. On January 6 the Mainland took another step, and allowed in seven value-added telecommunications services. The Mainland's cross-Strait trade in services agreement was supposed to give Taiwan special e-commerce treatment. Instead, these have been given to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone. Political disputes made Taiwan miss a golden opportunity. It must now catch up. It must pass the agreement as soon as possible. It must accelerate the process of trade liberalization and integration into the Asian-Pacific regional economy. Taiwan's industrial competitiveness risks disintegration.
Full text below:
The Shanghai Free Trade Zone is a means by which the Chinese mainland can join the TPP. On January 6 the Mainland took another step, and allowed in seven value-added telecommunications services. The Mainland's cross-Strait trade in services agreement was supposed to give Taiwan special e-commerce treatment. Instead, these have been given to the Shanghai Free Trade Zone. Political disputes made Taiwan miss a golden opportunity. It must now catch up. It must pass the agreement as soon as possible. It must accelerate the process of trade liberalization and integration into the Asian-Pacific regional economy. Taiwan's industrial competitiveness risks disintegration.
The United States is willing to allow the Chinese mainland to take part in TPP negotiations. The Mainland has yet to officially respond. It is promoting the ASEAN Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) negotiations while it keeps an eye on TPP negotiations . The Shanghai Free Trade Zone went into effect last September. Since then the Mainland has aggressively used FTAs to achieve a new wave of trade liberalization. Its goal was obvious, and the results have been substantitive.
According to news reports, late last November the Shanghai Free Trade Zone Trade and Industry Department admitted 1,733 new companies. These funded 1675 new enterprises. Total registered capital approached 40 billion RMB. As we can see, the Shanghai Free Trade Zone has attracted considerable domestic capital. It has inspired the establishment of free trade zones in the Tianjin Binhai New Area, Guangdong, Hong Kong, and Macau Free Trade Zone, the Zhejiang Zhoushan area, Chongqing Two Rivers area, Hebei Caofeidian area, and Fujian Pingtan area.
The Chinese mainland is using free trade zones as a means of liberalization. It is loosening regulations to attract private capital and a foreign presence. This achieves its goal of promoting investment. This also enables it to meet regional trade agreement liberalization requirements.
More importantly, Mainland China's accession to WTO constitutes its first wave of trade liberalization and integration with the global economy. Economic liberalization has enabled the Mainland to enjoy a decade of rapid growth. The Mainland has successfully transitioned from an agriculturally-based economy to an industrially-based economy. The Shanghai Free Trade Zone also explores ways of gradually transitioning from an industrially-based economy to a service-based industry. The Mainland is moving in the same direction as the developed economies. Taiwan must pay attention to the Mainland's development and seize whatever opportunities present themselves.
The TPP and RCEP are two forces for Asian-Pacific regional economic integration, and a new wave of Chinese mainland industrial restructuring. Taiwan has no time to waste. It must ride the wave of Asian-Pacific economic integration as soon as possible. It must take concrete steps to ensure Taiwan's accession the RCEP and TPP.
Taiwan may wish to join the RCEP or the TPP. If so, it must acknowledge the role of the Mainland. The Mainland is Taiwan's largest trading partner. Taiwan must sign the Cross-Strait Trade in Services Agreement and the Cross-Strait Trade in Goods Agreement, as soon as possible. These will help Taiwan's integration into the Asia-Pacific regional economy. They will reduce the impact of the FTA between Mainland China and Korea on Taiwan's economy.
Taiwan must take advantage of cross-Strait economic cooperation, as soon as possible. It must seek ways to integrate the two sides in the global economy and the East Asian regional economy. Mainland China has yet to join the TPP. Taiwan seeks early accession to the TPP. To improve its chances, Taiwan must understand the Mainland's reasons for joining the TPP. It must adjust its timetable for joining the TPP. It must realize its chances for joining may change.
Secondly, taking part in regional economic integration requires putting industry interests first. The TPP is a new style, high-standard regional trade agreement. Industry as a whole will benefit. But Taiwan must consider the impact on agriculture and traditional industries. It must provide concrete policy plans for industrial transformation.
Take the Taiwan-US Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA). The most difficult issue during negotiations was U.S. beef imports. Was Taiwan ready for the impact? Are producers of other sensitive agricultural products prepared to expand production in order to make the pie bigger? Take intellectual property. The TPP may require term extensions for patent medicines. This may increase health care costs. Are coping strategies in place? The government must communicate with industry before joining. It must mitigate the impact on industry. We believe TPP will enhance the efficiency of Taiwan's economy .
Taiwan must pay attention to Mainland Chinese dynamics. It must maintain good communications. The Mainland has already joined the RCEP. We must promote Taiwan's accession as soon as possible, before the RCEP completes negotiations in 2015. We must get a firm handle on RCEP negotiations once they are completed in 2015. We must explain the role of our foreign economic partners to the public. We must seek to maximize public support, and minimize opposition political pressure. We must also propose a comprehensive domestic industrial policy plan, on several tracks at the same time. We must sign regional trade agreements to improve the domestic economy. Only then can we achieve early integration into the new Asian-Pacific regional economy.
社論－加入TPP及RCEP政府需全面布局
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年01月09日 04:09
可視為中國大陸加入TPP試點的上海自由貿易區，於1月6日進一步開放7項增值電信業務，將大陸在《兩岸服務貿易協議》中開放給台灣的電子商務優惠，先給了上海自貿區，台灣因政治爭議錯失了一次大好機會，若再不急起直追，盡速通過協議，並加速經貿自由化進程以融入亞太區域經濟整合，台灣產業競爭優勢可能有崩解之虞。
美國已表示願意邀請中國大陸加入TPP談判，大陸雖然尚未正式回應，但在積極推動參與東協區域全面經濟夥伴關係（RCEP）談判同時，始終重視並追蹤TPP談判的進展。事實上，我們從上海自貿區去年9月底掛牌啟動後的運作可以看出，大陸積極利用自貿區試點達成新一波經貿自由化的目的相當明顯，且已收到實質成效。
報載上海自貿區截至去年11月底，工商部門已辦新設企業共計1733家，其中內資新設企業1675家，註冊資本額近400億元，可看出上海自貿區的開放措施吸引許多內資入駐，也因此引起天津濱海新區、粵港澳自貿區、浙江舟山、重慶兩江、河北曹妃甸、福建平潭等地區對於成立自由貿易區的興趣。
中國大陸藉由自由貿易區各試點所進行的開放措施，以鬆綁法規方式吸引民間資金及外資進駐投資，不但達成促進投資之目的，亦符合全球經貿自由化下，積極洽談的區域貿易協定自由化要求。
更重要的是，中國大陸加入WTO做為第一波與全球經貿自由化接軌以來，已使大陸坐享十年經貿自由化所帶來的快速成長果實，並將大陸產業結構成功地從農業為主轉為工業為主。此次藉由推動上海自貿區進行試點，進一步試探大陸從工業為主的產業結構型態，逐漸轉為以服務業為主要產業型態，朝向已開發經濟體看齊的方向前進，值得台灣關注其發展，並掌握商機。
面對TPP及RCEP兩股亞太區域經濟整合的力道，以及中國大陸新一波產業結構調整，台灣實無時間繼續蹉跎，必須盡速全力融入新一波亞太經濟整合態勢之中，以具體行動，雙軌推動台灣加入RCEP及TPP。
首先，無論台灣想要加入RCEP或是TPP，都必須正視中國大陸的角色。大陸是台灣第一大貿易夥伴，盡速完成《兩岸服務貿易協議》之生效，以及海峽兩岸貨品貿易協議之簽署，將有利於台灣融入亞太區域經濟整合，並減緩「中」韓FTA對於台灣經濟之衝擊。
此外，台灣應該盡速利用兩岸經濟合作，尋求兩岸共同融入全球及東亞區域經濟整合的途徑。面對中國大陸尚未加入TPP的事實，為提高台灣盡早加入TPP之機率，台灣應積極掌握大陸加入TPP之意願，隨時修正台灣加入TPP的時程及機率。
其次，加入區域經濟整合，仍要以產業利益為先。面對TPP為新型態高標準的區域貿易協定，雖然整體產業會因而受益，然而台灣仍應重視農業及部分傳統產業所受到的衝擊，提出產業轉型的具體政策規畫。
舉例而言，台美貿易暨投資架構協議（TIFA）談判時最為棘手的美牛開放，台灣是否已準備好對策？對於其他敏感性農產品是否已經做好藉由引進產品擴大加工製造、把餅做大的準備？智慧財產權部分，面對TPP可能要求原廠藥延長專利期限所可能提高的健保成本，是否已經有因應對策？政府若能在加入之前，與產業做好充分溝通，減緩產業衝擊，相信更能提高加入TPP對於台灣經濟的效益。
台灣應關注中國大陸的動態，並與之做好溝通。對於大陸已加入的RCEP，應盡速於2015年RCEP完成談判前，推動台灣加入，並掌握2015年RCEP談判完成後，外圍經濟夥伴參與條款之發展，對內應充分溝通，爭取最大化民意支持力度，減輕反對黨的政治壓力，同時提出完整的國內產業政策規畫，多軌進行，才能提高簽署區域貿易協定對國內經濟之效能，真正達成盡早融入新一波亞太區域經濟整合的目的。
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
The Great Silent Majority Finally Has a Voice
The Great Silent Majority Finally Has a Voice
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 8, 2014
Summary: On the eve of the Control Yuan's second impeachment hearing, Academia Sinica member Hu Fo personally denounced the persecution campaign waged against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming. We want Hu Fo to know that he is not alone. His is not a voice in the wilderness. Taiwan society has not sunk to the level where right and wrong no longer matter. It is merely that those who spout absurdities have seized the bully pulpit. We would like to express our appreciation for Hu Fo's moral courage.
Full text below:
Yesterday the Control Yuan convened another impeachment hearing. After more than two hours of debate, the final vote was six against six. The move to impeach failed to pass. For the time being Huang Shim-ing will retain his post as Prosecutor General. Huang Shi-ming said that if the Control Yuan or a court of the first instance found him guilty, he would step down. Today, the Control Yuan failed to impeach him for the second time. According to Control Yuan provisions, the same person shall not be subject to impeachment proceedings for the same offense more than twice. This means that for the time being at least, Huang Shi-ming's job is secure.
On the eve of the Control Yuan's second impeachment hearing, Academia Sinica member Hu Fo submitted an article to the China Times. It was entitled, "In Broad daylight, Wallowing in Sin." He invoked the constitution and the rule of law. He personally denounced the persecution campaign waged against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming.
Hu Fo's article merits attention. He is among the few who have come forth in support of Huang Shi-ming. He has underscored the most troubling question that haunts our society. Why have the opposition party whip and the speaker of the legislature not been investigated for their crimes, while President Ma, who supported an investigation, been denounced seven ways from Sunday? Why have the two prosecutors who participated in influence peddling been repeatedly let off, scot free, while the Prosecutor General, who prosecuted influence peddling, been villified as Public Enemy Number One, as guilty of some heinous crime, and as someone who must be dismissed or even impeached to mollify public outrage?
In his article Hu Fo avoided political rhetoric. Instead he cited the constitution and the law. He offered legal interpretations of the charges against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming. For example, he cited the constitution's presidential powers provisions, and the Court Organization Law. He affirmed that the Prosecutor General does indeed have the duty to report to the President, especially when the case involves the Legislative Yuan, the Minister of Justice, the High Prosecutors Office, and prosecutors. The case had a bearing on the independence of the criminal justice system and on major criminal cases. The Prosecutor General reported to the President and accepted Presidential advice, entirely consistent with his duties. His conduct was fully responsible. How can anyone mischaracterize this as "leaking secrets" to the President?
Well said, indeed. Over the past several months a witch hunt against "leaking secrets" has eclipsed the prosecution of influence peddling. Many commentators have been either vague or evasive about influence peddling. But when dealing with "leaking secrets," they have held up a magnifying glass and gone over the issue with a fine tooth comb. To paraphrase President Ma's much derided remark: "If this is not a double standard, what is a double standard?"
If President Ma and Prosecutor General Huang did nothing illegal, why have they been treated like "Enemies of the People" over the past several months? Why, on the other hand, have the politicians and prosecutors who participated in influence peddling been treated as if they were egregiously wronged innocent victims? Taiwan has beein inculcating the rule of law and moral education for many years. The public ought to have a better understanding of due process and right and wrong than this. So why have right and wrong so outrageously inverted? How exactly did this come about?
Hu Fo concluded his article with the following lament. "The current political situation in Taiwan involves social polarization, plutarchy, factional struggle, and Blue vs. Green populist demagoguery. Society is indifferent to right and wrong. It substitutes falsehood for reality. It lacks values and direction. People have lost faith in democracy and the rule of law." Hu Fo sighed in frustration. He was in essence sighing for everyone on Taiwan.
Consider the current atmosphere on Taiwan. It is either Blue vs. Green opposition or factional interests uber alles. We can almost predict what the response will be to Hu Fo's article. His arguments about the rule of law may be irrefutable. But it will not matter. His arguments about right and wrong my be clear. But it will not matter. Many in the Green Camp and many who are unhappy with the Ma government, will insist that speaking on behalf of President Ma and Huang Shi-ming is wrong and must be denounced. Even if one is entirely right, to them it will make no difference.
One can predict that over the next few days, Hu Fo will be attacked, en masse, in a wide range of fora. All manner of ugly rhetoric will be emerge. A thousand fingers will be pointed at him. But on the other hand, Hu Fo's words will echo in our ears. Perhaps they will provoke a reaction from those concerned only about Blue or Green political coloration, and those who care nothing for right and wrong. They will make them show their hand. That might not be such a bad thing. At least it will validate Hu Fo's assessment of the current state of Taiwan .
We want Hu Fo to know that he is not alone. His is not a voice in the wilderness. Taiwan society has not sunk to the level where right and wrong no longer matter. It is merely that those who spout absurdities have seized the bully pulpit. Many members of the public have decided that they may as well remain silent. It does not mean everyone is blind to the facts. Hu Fo's article points to the many voices of the Great Silent Majority. Here we would like to express our appreciation for Hu Fo's moral courage.
社論－沉默多數的心聲終於獲得伸張
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年01月08日 04:09
監察院昨日再度召開彈劾審查會，歷經兩個多小時的討論，最後以6票對6票，彈劾案未過關，黃世銘暫時保住檢察總長的職位。由於先前黃世銘曾表示，若遭監察院彈劾或法院一審判有罪，他就下台；如今監院二度彈劾未過關，依規定監院不得再對同一人、同一案由提案彈劾；這意味黃世銘將暫保總長職位。
就在監院召開二次彈劾審查會前夕，中央研究院院士胡佛以〈光天化日、陷人於罪〉為題投書《中國時報》時論廣場，以《憲法》與法律的高度，針對檢察總長黃世銘所蒙受的對待與攻訐，提出他個人的評論。
這篇評論值得重視的原因，不只因為其是很少數支持黃世銘行止的論述之一，而是其道出了這個社會中許多人心中最大的困惑：為什麼進行關說的在野黨總召與立法院長沒啥人加以質疑，而支持偵辦的馬總統被罵到臭頭？為什麼接受關說的兩位檢察官一而再、再而三的被「輕輕放下」，而辦關說的檢察總長卻彷彿犯下天理不容、人神共憤的滔天大罪，非治之以撤職、彈劾甚或司法審判，否則不足以平息輿論之怒火？
胡院士在他的投書中，完全不玩弄政治語言，而是引經據典透過《憲法》及相關法律條文的規定，詮釋檢察總長黃世銘所受到的所有指控。例如他根據《憲法》中有關總統職權以及《法院組織法》中有關最高檢署檢察總長產生方式的規定，認為檢察總長當然要向總統負政策執行的責任。特別是當碰到一樁涉及立法院長、法務部部長、高檢署檢察長及檢察官，且影響到司法獨立的特殊重大不法案件，檢察總長立即向總統提出報告，並接受總統諮詢，這在職務的履行上，是非常盡責的作法，如何談得上向總統洩密呢？
誠哉斯言，過去幾個月以來，不就是針對「洩密」的撻伐，遠遠多過對「關說」的質疑！不少論者碰到「關說」的部分不是模糊以對、就是語焉不詳，但是一碰到「洩密」的部分，就是拿著放大鏡，仿若雞蛋裡挑骨頭似的檢視。套用馬總統一再被嘲弄的一句修辭法：如果這樣都不是雙重標準，還要怎樣才算是雙重標準呢？
如果馬總統與黃檢察總長都沒有「違法」疑義，那麼過去幾個月，為什麼是他們被打成仿如人民公敵，而那些行使關說的政客與被關說的檢察官，卻恍若成為最無辜的受害者？我們在台灣實施這麼多年的法治教育與道德教育，對依法行政的判定，對倫理是非的分辨，不應該是這樣的吧！那麼為什麼竟然會顛倒是非至此呢？這一切又到底是怎麼回事呢？
胡佛院士在他投書最後的結語中，發出了這樣的慨嘆：「當前的台灣政局，在族群撕裂、金權交易、派閥牽引、民粹操弄及藍綠惡鬥的情況下，整個社會變成無是無非，甚至以假當真，不但缺乏正確的價值觀與發展方向，且令人對民主法治喪失信心。」試問，胡院士嘆息與無奈，不正就是當前整個台灣最需要嘆息與無奈的地方嗎？
審視當前台灣的輿情氛圍，不就是藍綠分立、黨派為先嗎？講得再直白一些，我們幾乎現在就可以預期，胡院士這篇讜論，就算其中的就法論法的論證再堅實不過，就算其所論述的價值是非也再清晰不過，但在許多綠營人士，或是部分不滿馬政府人士的眼中，替馬總統與黃世銘講話就是不對，就是該批，那怕你講得全都是對的也沒用！
可預見，這兩天瞄準胡院士攻擊的文字，肯定會在各個平台量產，什麼難聽的話都會出籠，胡院士免不了要暫時陷入「橫眉冷對千夫指」的處境了！不過換個角度說，如果胡院士一篇擲地有聲的文字，能夠引出那些只問藍綠、不論是非的論者立即現形，那也不是壞事，至少它印證了胡院士對台灣現況的評斷。
我們想說的是，胡院士並不孤獨，他的見解也絕不是這個社會中的少數聲音！台灣社會並沒有沉淪到是非不分的地步，只不過在許多奇談怪論占領重要發言位置後，許多人乾脆選擇沉默，但絕不意味大家都已盲目到看不清事實，胡院士的這篇文字，正是道出了許多沉默大多數人的心聲，在此謹對胡院士的道德勇氣，表達我們最誠摯的敬意！
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 8, 2014
Summary: On the eve of the Control Yuan's second impeachment hearing, Academia Sinica member Hu Fo personally denounced the persecution campaign waged against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming. We want Hu Fo to know that he is not alone. His is not a voice in the wilderness. Taiwan society has not sunk to the level where right and wrong no longer matter. It is merely that those who spout absurdities have seized the bully pulpit. We would like to express our appreciation for Hu Fo's moral courage.
Full text below:
Yesterday the Control Yuan convened another impeachment hearing. After more than two hours of debate, the final vote was six against six. The move to impeach failed to pass. For the time being Huang Shim-ing will retain his post as Prosecutor General. Huang Shi-ming said that if the Control Yuan or a court of the first instance found him guilty, he would step down. Today, the Control Yuan failed to impeach him for the second time. According to Control Yuan provisions, the same person shall not be subject to impeachment proceedings for the same offense more than twice. This means that for the time being at least, Huang Shi-ming's job is secure.
On the eve of the Control Yuan's second impeachment hearing, Academia Sinica member Hu Fo submitted an article to the China Times. It was entitled, "In Broad daylight, Wallowing in Sin." He invoked the constitution and the rule of law. He personally denounced the persecution campaign waged against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming.
Hu Fo's article merits attention. He is among the few who have come forth in support of Huang Shi-ming. He has underscored the most troubling question that haunts our society. Why have the opposition party whip and the speaker of the legislature not been investigated for their crimes, while President Ma, who supported an investigation, been denounced seven ways from Sunday? Why have the two prosecutors who participated in influence peddling been repeatedly let off, scot free, while the Prosecutor General, who prosecuted influence peddling, been villified as Public Enemy Number One, as guilty of some heinous crime, and as someone who must be dismissed or even impeached to mollify public outrage?
In his article Hu Fo avoided political rhetoric. Instead he cited the constitution and the law. He offered legal interpretations of the charges against Prosecutor General Huang Shi-ming. For example, he cited the constitution's presidential powers provisions, and the Court Organization Law. He affirmed that the Prosecutor General does indeed have the duty to report to the President, especially when the case involves the Legislative Yuan, the Minister of Justice, the High Prosecutors Office, and prosecutors. The case had a bearing on the independence of the criminal justice system and on major criminal cases. The Prosecutor General reported to the President and accepted Presidential advice, entirely consistent with his duties. His conduct was fully responsible. How can anyone mischaracterize this as "leaking secrets" to the President?
Well said, indeed. Over the past several months a witch hunt against "leaking secrets" has eclipsed the prosecution of influence peddling. Many commentators have been either vague or evasive about influence peddling. But when dealing with "leaking secrets," they have held up a magnifying glass and gone over the issue with a fine tooth comb. To paraphrase President Ma's much derided remark: "If this is not a double standard, what is a double standard?"
If President Ma and Prosecutor General Huang did nothing illegal, why have they been treated like "Enemies of the People" over the past several months? Why, on the other hand, have the politicians and prosecutors who participated in influence peddling been treated as if they were egregiously wronged innocent victims? Taiwan has beein inculcating the rule of law and moral education for many years. The public ought to have a better understanding of due process and right and wrong than this. So why have right and wrong so outrageously inverted? How exactly did this come about?
Hu Fo concluded his article with the following lament. "The current political situation in Taiwan involves social polarization, plutarchy, factional struggle, and Blue vs. Green populist demagoguery. Society is indifferent to right and wrong. It substitutes falsehood for reality. It lacks values and direction. People have lost faith in democracy and the rule of law." Hu Fo sighed in frustration. He was in essence sighing for everyone on Taiwan.
Consider the current atmosphere on Taiwan. It is either Blue vs. Green opposition or factional interests uber alles. We can almost predict what the response will be to Hu Fo's article. His arguments about the rule of law may be irrefutable. But it will not matter. His arguments about right and wrong my be clear. But it will not matter. Many in the Green Camp and many who are unhappy with the Ma government, will insist that speaking on behalf of President Ma and Huang Shi-ming is wrong and must be denounced. Even if one is entirely right, to them it will make no difference.
One can predict that over the next few days, Hu Fo will be attacked, en masse, in a wide range of fora. All manner of ugly rhetoric will be emerge. A thousand fingers will be pointed at him. But on the other hand, Hu Fo's words will echo in our ears. Perhaps they will provoke a reaction from those concerned only about Blue or Green political coloration, and those who care nothing for right and wrong. They will make them show their hand. That might not be such a bad thing. At least it will validate Hu Fo's assessment of the current state of Taiwan .
We want Hu Fo to know that he is not alone. His is not a voice in the wilderness. Taiwan society has not sunk to the level where right and wrong no longer matter. It is merely that those who spout absurdities have seized the bully pulpit. Many members of the public have decided that they may as well remain silent. It does not mean everyone is blind to the facts. Hu Fo's article points to the many voices of the Great Silent Majority. Here we would like to express our appreciation for Hu Fo's moral courage.
社論－沉默多數的心聲終於獲得伸張
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊 2014年01月08日 04:09
監察院昨日再度召開彈劾審查會，歷經兩個多小時的討論，最後以6票對6票，彈劾案未過關，黃世銘暫時保住檢察總長的職位。由於先前黃世銘曾表示，若遭監察院彈劾或法院一審判有罪，他就下台；如今監院二度彈劾未過關，依規定監院不得再對同一人、同一案由提案彈劾；這意味黃世銘將暫保總長職位。
就在監院召開二次彈劾審查會前夕，中央研究院院士胡佛以〈光天化日、陷人於罪〉為題投書《中國時報》時論廣場，以《憲法》與法律的高度，針對檢察總長黃世銘所蒙受的對待與攻訐，提出他個人的評論。
這篇評論值得重視的原因，不只因為其是很少數支持黃世銘行止的論述之一，而是其道出了這個社會中許多人心中最大的困惑：為什麼進行關說的在野黨總召與立法院長沒啥人加以質疑，而支持偵辦的馬總統被罵到臭頭？為什麼接受關說的兩位檢察官一而再、再而三的被「輕輕放下」，而辦關說的檢察總長卻彷彿犯下天理不容、人神共憤的滔天大罪，非治之以撤職、彈劾甚或司法審判，否則不足以平息輿論之怒火？
胡院士在他的投書中，完全不玩弄政治語言，而是引經據典透過《憲法》及相關法律條文的規定，詮釋檢察總長黃世銘所受到的所有指控。例如他根據《憲法》中有關總統職權以及《法院組織法》中有關最高檢署檢察總長產生方式的規定，認為檢察總長當然要向總統負政策執行的責任。特別是當碰到一樁涉及立法院長、法務部部長、高檢署檢察長及檢察官，且影響到司法獨立的特殊重大不法案件，檢察總長立即向總統提出報告，並接受總統諮詢，這在職務的履行上，是非常盡責的作法，如何談得上向總統洩密呢？
誠哉斯言，過去幾個月以來，不就是針對「洩密」的撻伐，遠遠多過對「關說」的質疑！不少論者碰到「關說」的部分不是模糊以對、就是語焉不詳，但是一碰到「洩密」的部分，就是拿著放大鏡，仿若雞蛋裡挑骨頭似的檢視。套用馬總統一再被嘲弄的一句修辭法：如果這樣都不是雙重標準，還要怎樣才算是雙重標準呢？
如果馬總統與黃檢察總長都沒有「違法」疑義，那麼過去幾個月，為什麼是他們被打成仿如人民公敵，而那些行使關說的政客與被關說的檢察官，卻恍若成為最無辜的受害者？我們在台灣實施這麼多年的法治教育與道德教育，對依法行政的判定，對倫理是非的分辨，不應該是這樣的吧！那麼為什麼竟然會顛倒是非至此呢？這一切又到底是怎麼回事呢？
胡佛院士在他投書最後的結語中，發出了這樣的慨嘆：「當前的台灣政局，在族群撕裂、金權交易、派閥牽引、民粹操弄及藍綠惡鬥的情況下，整個社會變成無是無非，甚至以假當真，不但缺乏正確的價值觀與發展方向，且令人對民主法治喪失信心。」試問，胡院士嘆息與無奈，不正就是當前整個台灣最需要嘆息與無奈的地方嗎？
審視當前台灣的輿情氛圍，不就是藍綠分立、黨派為先嗎？講得再直白一些，我們幾乎現在就可以預期，胡院士這篇讜論，就算其中的就法論法的論證再堅實不過，就算其所論述的價值是非也再清晰不過，但在許多綠營人士，或是部分不滿馬政府人士的眼中，替馬總統與黃世銘講話就是不對，就是該批，那怕你講得全都是對的也沒用！
可預見，這兩天瞄準胡院士攻擊的文字，肯定會在各個平台量產，什麼難聽的話都會出籠，胡院士免不了要暫時陷入「橫眉冷對千夫指」的處境了！不過換個角度說，如果胡院士一篇擲地有聲的文字，能夠引出那些只問藍綠、不論是非的論者立即現形，那也不是壞事，至少它印證了胡院士對台灣現況的評斷。
我們想說的是，胡院士並不孤獨，他的見解也絕不是這個社會中的少數聲音！台灣社會並沒有沉淪到是非不分的地步，只不過在許多奇談怪論占領重要發言位置後，許多人乾脆選擇沉默，但絕不意味大家都已盲目到看不清事實，胡院士的這篇文字，正是道出了許多沉默大多數人的心聲，在此謹對胡院士的道德勇氣，表達我們最誠摯的敬意！
Monday, January 6, 2014
A Just Cause Invariably Gains Support: Key to China's Return to Glory
A Just Cause Invariably Gains Support: Key to China's Return to Glory
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 7, 2014
Summary: The New Year has already begun, but tensions in Northeast Asia have not improved. Beijing has forcefully reiterated that "The Chinese people do not fear demons, and do not believe evil will prevail." It has already declared its intention to fight to the bitter end. But the Japanese government under Abe shows no signs of softening. We appeal to all parties. War is hell. It involves life and death. When all is said and done, peace remains the highest value. Neither side should precipitate a major disaster merely because it could not endure a minor slight. Neither side should act to the detriment of its own national growth, national interests, and to regional security.
Full text below:
The New Year has already begun, but tensions in Northeast Asia have not improved. Beijing has forcefully reiterated that "The Chinese people do not fear demons, and do not believe evil will prevail." It has already declared its intention to fight to the bitter end. Some in the Mainland military and media say that sooner or later China and Japan must have a showdown. But the Japanese government under Abe shows no signs of softening. It even added fuel to the fire by visiting the Yasukuni Shrine. It insists on further revising its textbooks, whitewashing Japanese war crimes. Chinese and Japanese nationalist sentiments are escalating. The outside world long ago concluded that the situation will get worse before it gets better. Consider the big picture. Consider practical interests. We appeal to all parties. War is hell. It involves life and death. When all is said and done, peace remains the highest value. Neither side should precipitate a major disaster merely because it could not endure a minor slight. Neither side should act to the detriment of its own national growth, national interests, and to regional security.
Everything has a beginning and end. The East China Sea dispute arose because Japan "nationalized" the Diaoyutai Islands. The Japanese side insists that its motives were pure. But It gave no prior warning. its behavior afterwards was unacceptable. Naturally this led to unnecessary suspicions. Once the status quo was disrupted, it became difficult to restore. Beijing established territorial waters baselines and an air defense identification zone. It dispatched maritime surveillance and fisheries vessels to Diaoyutai Islands waters. It demonstrated a willingness to go to war. The Japanese side fired back three security treaty arrows. It openly named China as the biggest threat to its national defense. It sought international support from the United States, Australia, and ASEAN. It is determined to crush Mainland China. Late last year, Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine, in a move deliberately calculated to provoke Mainland China. No wonder the Mainland Chinese Foreign Ministry named Abe persona non grata. A vicious cycle has formed between Mainland China and Japan.
Escalating tensions and conflict involve a process. First the parties exchange verbal threats. They halt exchanges. They withdraw diplomatic personnel. They impose economic sanctions. They dispatch troops. They stockpile materiel. A small-scale conflict becomes full-scale war. There are invariably warning signs. Most importantly, the countries involved must not send complex, contradictory signals. They must avoid misunderstandings and miscalculations. After all, rationally speaking, neither Mainland China nor Japan, nor even the United States, considers conflict absolutely necessary. In case the situation spins out of control, it will be a lose/lose, lose/lose/lose, everyone loses scenario. No country will benefit. Consider the situation logically. Many believe the United States hopes to provoke a Sino-Japanese conflict in order to undermine Mainland China's modernization. But such opportunism is far too risky. The consequences are far too unpredictable. America cannot afford such a gamble.
He who creates a problem ought to solve the problem. As matters stand, Mainland China cannot accept Japan's "nationalization" of the Diaoyutai Islands. Beijing has already delineated its territorial waters baselines. It has no reason to rescind its air defense identification zone. Japan may refuse to recognize Beijing's air defense identification zone. Japan's desire to become a "normal nation" is understandable. But whatever the outcome, Tokyo must confront Japan's past. It must dispel Asian-Pacific doubts about its reversion to militarism. In particular, Japan must acknowledge the reality of a rising Mainland China. It must deal with the WWII war criminals enshrined in the Yasukuni Shrine. It must avoid pouring salt into China and South Korea's wounds. It must seek diplomatic solutions based on current realities. Abe's empty rhetoric and lies will only increase the complexity of the problem. He must says something more constructive. He must do something more substantive. He must not go too far. That is how he can ease the current conflict.
We also have some suggestion for Mainland China. This is the 120th anniversary of First Sino-Japanese War. For over 100 years, the Chinese people have endured humiliation. The entire nation seeks to restore China's glorious history. Today a thriving Mainland China is a reality. Essentially the problem of being invaded, of being starved, and of being denounced has been solved. The Chinese people have the opportunity to contribute to peaceful development and economic prosperity. Unless there is no alternative, Beijing must safeguard China's national sovereignty, national security, and its pursuit of economic prosperity. Its national strength must have a firm foundation. If harsh words are required, it must utter them in a quiet voice. It must resort to more civilized means than others use to solve problems. America's hegemonic mannerism, and its "Big Stick" approach, is alien to China's political tradition. The best military strategy is an intelligent military strategy. A just cause will invariably gain broad support. Winning without fighting is always the best policy. If refusing to endure a minor slight results in a major debacle, and deprives China of the opportunity to restore its former glory, the CCP will go down in infamy.
Lastly, we must address President Ma Ying-jeou's long touted East China Sea Peace Initiative. Some say his proposal includes only principles, and lacks a roadmap for concrete action. But this sees only part of the picture. All of the countries involved have concerns they dare not express publicly. But privately all believe the disputes should be shelved, the resources developed jointly, and the dispute settled peacefully. In this regard, we must give the Ma government its due. Taipei's voice may be small. But the countries involved should all be thinking along these lines, and seeking to solve the problem. Taipei's proposal shows that it is a defender of the regional peace.
社論－得道多助才是中華民族復興之路
2014-01-07 01:54
中國時報
【本報訊】
新年伊始，東北亞緊張局勢並未好轉，北京儘管還未再度說出「中國人不怕鬼、不信邪」的狠話，但不惜奉陪到底的重話已經出口，大陸軍方及媒體迭有中、日終須一戰的呼聲，不過日本安倍政府非但未有絲毫軟化的跡象，還火上加油的前去參拜靖國神社，執意進一步修改教科書，在中日雙方民族主義情緒高漲的情況下，儘管外界早已認知，在局勢好轉之前，情況恐怕還有進一步惡化的可能，但不管是從大局出發或是現實利益考量，我們還是要懇切的呼籲相關各方，兵凶戰危，死生大事，一切還是要以和為貴，任何一方都不應小不忍而亂大謀，而損害了自己的國家發展、民族利益及區域安全。
物有本末、事有終始，東海爭議起源於日本將釣魚台國有化，雖然日方辯稱動機單純而善良，但自己的善意事前未見溝通、事後又不能讓人接受，當然就會引發必要或不必要的猜忌，而且現狀一經破壞即難恢復。北京先後劃出領海基線及防空識別區，派出海監、漁政船前往釣魚台海域執行公務，大有不惜一戰之慨。日方則是還以顏色的祭出安保三箭，明白把中國視為最大的國防威脅，並且分赴美、澳、東協爭取國際支持，企圖全面圍勦中共，而安倍去年底祭拜靖國神社的舉動更是蓄意挑動中方最敏感的神經，難怪中共外交部要將安倍列為不受歡迎人物。中、日雙方的惡性循環已經基本形成。
基本上，緊張和衝突的升高會有一個發展的過程，涉案各方會先由口頭威懾、中斷交流、撤使斷交、經濟制裁，調兵遣將、屯積糧草，從小規模的衝突再發展成全面的戰爭，事前總會有跡象可循。當前最重要的是，所有涉案的相關國家都不要送出錯綜複雜、前後矛盾的訊號，避免任何一方誤解、誤判局勢，畢竟在理性的層面上，中、日雙方，甚至美國都沒有蓄意製造衝突的絕對必要，萬一事態失控這將會是一個雙輸、三輸、多輸的最壞局面，沒有任何一個國家可以從中漁利。從邏輯上推敲，許多人相信美國想要挑起中、日衝突，從而破壞中國現代化的進程，但這種火中取栗的作法風險太大，美國未必承擔得起不可預知的後果。
若說解鈴還需繫鈴人，於今之計，中國當然不能接受日本把釣魚台國有化，北京已經劃定、設立的領海基線、防空識別區當然也無撤回之理，日本可以不承認大陸的防空識別區，它想要建立正常國家的意圖雖然可以理解，但東京好歹還是要坦誠面對其過去的歷史，祛除亞太國家對其重返軍國主義的疑慮，尤其是日本必須理性面對已然成長茁壯的中國大陸，務實處理靖國神社中所供奉的二次世界大戰戰犯問題，避免觸動尤其是中、韓兩國的歷史傷痛，然後大家再在當前現狀的基礎上，用外交的方式來徐圖解決之道。安倍的空言、大話只會增加問題的複雜性，多說好話、多做實事、莫為已甚，應為當前緩解衝突之道。
同樣的，我們對中國大陸也有一些良心的建議，今年是甲午戰爭120周年，百多年來中國人受盡了欺凌，舉國上下莫不以尋回歷史的光榮為職志，如今中國大陸成長茁壯已成事實，不但基本解決了挨打、挨餓、挨罵的問題，還有餘力為世界的和平發展、經濟的繁榮做出一定程度的貢獻，除非萬不得已，北京今天更應該在維護國家主權、保護國民安全、追求經濟發展之餘，以實力為基礎，學會輕聲說重話，用更文明的方式來解決問題。美式胳膊粗、棍子長的霸權作風並非中國政治文化的一部分，上兵伐謀，做一個得道多助的善霸，不戰而屈人之兵才是上上之策，若小不忍而亂大謀，毀了中國復興機會，中共將成為千古罪人。
最後，我們還是要談到馬英九總統所一再主張的東海和平倡議，雖然有人說這種主張只有原則，缺乏具體的行動綱領和路線圖，但這是只知其一不知其二，所有相關國家即使在公開場合都有各種各樣的顧慮，不敢公開給予肯定，但私下莫不認為這種擱置爭議、共同開發、和平解決的提議才是解決衝突的最佳方案。對此，我們還是要給馬政府相當的肯定和支持，也呼籲相關國家莫以台灣人微言輕，而應朝此方向思考，謀求解決問題，台灣的這種主張也說明了我們正是區域和平的維護者和諦造者。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 7, 2014
Summary: The New Year has already begun, but tensions in Northeast Asia have not improved. Beijing has forcefully reiterated that "The Chinese people do not fear demons, and do not believe evil will prevail." It has already declared its intention to fight to the bitter end. But the Japanese government under Abe shows no signs of softening. We appeal to all parties. War is hell. It involves life and death. When all is said and done, peace remains the highest value. Neither side should precipitate a major disaster merely because it could not endure a minor slight. Neither side should act to the detriment of its own national growth, national interests, and to regional security.
Full text below:
The New Year has already begun, but tensions in Northeast Asia have not improved. Beijing has forcefully reiterated that "The Chinese people do not fear demons, and do not believe evil will prevail." It has already declared its intention to fight to the bitter end. Some in the Mainland military and media say that sooner or later China and Japan must have a showdown. But the Japanese government under Abe shows no signs of softening. It even added fuel to the fire by visiting the Yasukuni Shrine. It insists on further revising its textbooks, whitewashing Japanese war crimes. Chinese and Japanese nationalist sentiments are escalating. The outside world long ago concluded that the situation will get worse before it gets better. Consider the big picture. Consider practical interests. We appeal to all parties. War is hell. It involves life and death. When all is said and done, peace remains the highest value. Neither side should precipitate a major disaster merely because it could not endure a minor slight. Neither side should act to the detriment of its own national growth, national interests, and to regional security.
Everything has a beginning and end. The East China Sea dispute arose because Japan "nationalized" the Diaoyutai Islands. The Japanese side insists that its motives were pure. But It gave no prior warning. its behavior afterwards was unacceptable. Naturally this led to unnecessary suspicions. Once the status quo was disrupted, it became difficult to restore. Beijing established territorial waters baselines and an air defense identification zone. It dispatched maritime surveillance and fisheries vessels to Diaoyutai Islands waters. It demonstrated a willingness to go to war. The Japanese side fired back three security treaty arrows. It openly named China as the biggest threat to its national defense. It sought international support from the United States, Australia, and ASEAN. It is determined to crush Mainland China. Late last year, Abe visited the Yasukuni Shrine, in a move deliberately calculated to provoke Mainland China. No wonder the Mainland Chinese Foreign Ministry named Abe persona non grata. A vicious cycle has formed between Mainland China and Japan.
Escalating tensions and conflict involve a process. First the parties exchange verbal threats. They halt exchanges. They withdraw diplomatic personnel. They impose economic sanctions. They dispatch troops. They stockpile materiel. A small-scale conflict becomes full-scale war. There are invariably warning signs. Most importantly, the countries involved must not send complex, contradictory signals. They must avoid misunderstandings and miscalculations. After all, rationally speaking, neither Mainland China nor Japan, nor even the United States, considers conflict absolutely necessary. In case the situation spins out of control, it will be a lose/lose, lose/lose/lose, everyone loses scenario. No country will benefit. Consider the situation logically. Many believe the United States hopes to provoke a Sino-Japanese conflict in order to undermine Mainland China's modernization. But such opportunism is far too risky. The consequences are far too unpredictable. America cannot afford such a gamble.
He who creates a problem ought to solve the problem. As matters stand, Mainland China cannot accept Japan's "nationalization" of the Diaoyutai Islands. Beijing has already delineated its territorial waters baselines. It has no reason to rescind its air defense identification zone. Japan may refuse to recognize Beijing's air defense identification zone. Japan's desire to become a "normal nation" is understandable. But whatever the outcome, Tokyo must confront Japan's past. It must dispel Asian-Pacific doubts about its reversion to militarism. In particular, Japan must acknowledge the reality of a rising Mainland China. It must deal with the WWII war criminals enshrined in the Yasukuni Shrine. It must avoid pouring salt into China and South Korea's wounds. It must seek diplomatic solutions based on current realities. Abe's empty rhetoric and lies will only increase the complexity of the problem. He must says something more constructive. He must do something more substantive. He must not go too far. That is how he can ease the current conflict.
We also have some suggestion for Mainland China. This is the 120th anniversary of First Sino-Japanese War. For over 100 years, the Chinese people have endured humiliation. The entire nation seeks to restore China's glorious history. Today a thriving Mainland China is a reality. Essentially the problem of being invaded, of being starved, and of being denounced has been solved. The Chinese people have the opportunity to contribute to peaceful development and economic prosperity. Unless there is no alternative, Beijing must safeguard China's national sovereignty, national security, and its pursuit of economic prosperity. Its national strength must have a firm foundation. If harsh words are required, it must utter them in a quiet voice. It must resort to more civilized means than others use to solve problems. America's hegemonic mannerism, and its "Big Stick" approach, is alien to China's political tradition. The best military strategy is an intelligent military strategy. A just cause will invariably gain broad support. Winning without fighting is always the best policy. If refusing to endure a minor slight results in a major debacle, and deprives China of the opportunity to restore its former glory, the CCP will go down in infamy.
Lastly, we must address President Ma Ying-jeou's long touted East China Sea Peace Initiative. Some say his proposal includes only principles, and lacks a roadmap for concrete action. But this sees only part of the picture. All of the countries involved have concerns they dare not express publicly. But privately all believe the disputes should be shelved, the resources developed jointly, and the dispute settled peacefully. In this regard, we must give the Ma government its due. Taipei's voice may be small. But the countries involved should all be thinking along these lines, and seeking to solve the problem. Taipei's proposal shows that it is a defender of the regional peace.
社論－得道多助才是中華民族復興之路
2014-01-07 01:54
中國時報
【本報訊】
新年伊始，東北亞緊張局勢並未好轉，北京儘管還未再度說出「中國人不怕鬼、不信邪」的狠話，但不惜奉陪到底的重話已經出口，大陸軍方及媒體迭有中、日終須一戰的呼聲，不過日本安倍政府非但未有絲毫軟化的跡象，還火上加油的前去參拜靖國神社，執意進一步修改教科書，在中日雙方民族主義情緒高漲的情況下，儘管外界早已認知，在局勢好轉之前，情況恐怕還有進一步惡化的可能，但不管是從大局出發或是現實利益考量，我們還是要懇切的呼籲相關各方，兵凶戰危，死生大事，一切還是要以和為貴，任何一方都不應小不忍而亂大謀，而損害了自己的國家發展、民族利益及區域安全。
物有本末、事有終始，東海爭議起源於日本將釣魚台國有化，雖然日方辯稱動機單純而善良，但自己的善意事前未見溝通、事後又不能讓人接受，當然就會引發必要或不必要的猜忌，而且現狀一經破壞即難恢復。北京先後劃出領海基線及防空識別區，派出海監、漁政船前往釣魚台海域執行公務，大有不惜一戰之慨。日方則是還以顏色的祭出安保三箭，明白把中國視為最大的國防威脅，並且分赴美、澳、東協爭取國際支持，企圖全面圍勦中共，而安倍去年底祭拜靖國神社的舉動更是蓄意挑動中方最敏感的神經，難怪中共外交部要將安倍列為不受歡迎人物。中、日雙方的惡性循環已經基本形成。
基本上，緊張和衝突的升高會有一個發展的過程，涉案各方會先由口頭威懾、中斷交流、撤使斷交、經濟制裁，調兵遣將、屯積糧草，從小規模的衝突再發展成全面的戰爭，事前總會有跡象可循。當前最重要的是，所有涉案的相關國家都不要送出錯綜複雜、前後矛盾的訊號，避免任何一方誤解、誤判局勢，畢竟在理性的層面上，中、日雙方，甚至美國都沒有蓄意製造衝突的絕對必要，萬一事態失控這將會是一個雙輸、三輸、多輸的最壞局面，沒有任何一個國家可以從中漁利。從邏輯上推敲，許多人相信美國想要挑起中、日衝突，從而破壞中國現代化的進程，但這種火中取栗的作法風險太大，美國未必承擔得起不可預知的後果。
若說解鈴還需繫鈴人，於今之計，中國當然不能接受日本把釣魚台國有化，北京已經劃定、設立的領海基線、防空識別區當然也無撤回之理，日本可以不承認大陸的防空識別區，它想要建立正常國家的意圖雖然可以理解，但東京好歹還是要坦誠面對其過去的歷史，祛除亞太國家對其重返軍國主義的疑慮，尤其是日本必須理性面對已然成長茁壯的中國大陸，務實處理靖國神社中所供奉的二次世界大戰戰犯問題，避免觸動尤其是中、韓兩國的歷史傷痛，然後大家再在當前現狀的基礎上，用外交的方式來徐圖解決之道。安倍的空言、大話只會增加問題的複雜性，多說好話、多做實事、莫為已甚，應為當前緩解衝突之道。
同樣的，我們對中國大陸也有一些良心的建議，今年是甲午戰爭120周年，百多年來中國人受盡了欺凌，舉國上下莫不以尋回歷史的光榮為職志，如今中國大陸成長茁壯已成事實，不但基本解決了挨打、挨餓、挨罵的問題，還有餘力為世界的和平發展、經濟的繁榮做出一定程度的貢獻，除非萬不得已，北京今天更應該在維護國家主權、保護國民安全、追求經濟發展之餘，以實力為基礎，學會輕聲說重話，用更文明的方式來解決問題。美式胳膊粗、棍子長的霸權作風並非中國政治文化的一部分，上兵伐謀，做一個得道多助的善霸，不戰而屈人之兵才是上上之策，若小不忍而亂大謀，毀了中國復興機會，中共將成為千古罪人。
最後，我們還是要談到馬英九總統所一再主張的東海和平倡議，雖然有人說這種主張只有原則，缺乏具體的行動綱領和路線圖，但這是只知其一不知其二，所有相關國家即使在公開場合都有各種各樣的顧慮，不敢公開給予肯定，但私下莫不認為這種擱置爭議、共同開發、和平解決的提議才是解決衝突的最佳方案。對此，我們還是要給馬政府相當的肯定和支持，也呼籲相關國家莫以台灣人微言輕，而應朝此方向思考，謀求解決問題，台灣的這種主張也說明了我們正是區域和平的維護者和諦造者。
Sunday, January 5, 2014
Jettisoning Taiwan Independence Harder than Overthrowing a Regime
Jettisoning Taiwan Independence Harder than Overthrowing a Regime
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 6, 2014
Summary: The DPP is immobilized by the shackles of Taiwan independence. it can neither advance nor retreat. In 2000, Taiwan independence granted Chen Shui-bian a grace period. The Taiwan independence forces that Su Tseng-chang currently faces are not so reasonable. The DPP must not pretend to jettison Taiwan independence as an electioneering ploy. It must jettison Taiwan independence in fact, to ensure Taiwan's survival. Does the DPP really intend to ride Taiwan independence to power in 2016, only to ride Taiwan independence from power in 2020? Taiwan is unlikely to survive the ordeal.
Full text below:
The DPP is expected to announce its "[Mainland] China Policy" on the 9th. The most closely watched issue is how it will distance itself from Taiwan independence.
Su Tseng-chang said, "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." Frank Hsieh has proposed "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. Ker Chien-ming has proposed "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Platform." Key players within the DPP realize Taiwan independence is a game they can no longer afford to play. Everyone is awaiting the DPP's upcoming "China Policy" announcement. Everyone wants to see how the DPP will deal with the Taiwan independence albatross around its neck.
Over 40 years ago, Taiwan independence overtly and covertly infiltrated the pro-democracy movement. Back then, we predicted that Taiwan independence could neither dominate nor endure. In 1991, following the lifting of martial law, the DPP announced its " Taiwan Independence Party Platform." The DPP became the standard bearer for the Taiwan independence movement. At the height of its arrogance, it cowed the KMT into hiding the ROC national flag during its election rallies, for fear it would result in lost votes. In 1999 however, for the sake of Chen Shui-bian's presidential bid, the DPP issued its "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." It strategically jettisoned its Taiwan independence stance. A split between Lien and Soong supporters enabled Chen to win office. But as soon as Chen took office, MAC Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen pressured President Chen Shui-bian into repudiating the 1992 consensus. The ruling DPP then forced the entire country to participate in its Taiwan independence antics, including the "rectification of names" and the "Referendum on UN membership." Tsai Ing-wen lost her presidential bid in 2012 because she repudidated the 1992 consensus. The DPP longs to return to power. As a result it has begun reforming its cross-strait policy. Su Tseng-chang declared that "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." Frank Hsieh proposed "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. Ker Chien-ming proposed "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." These have all led to controversy.
Indications are however, that the DPP will not be able to free itself from the bonds of Taiwan independence. Su Tseng-chang said "Freezing the Taiwan independence party platform is not under consideration." He has already given us the answer. As everyone can see, the DPP faces a dilemma. If it wants to return to power it must shrug off the shackles of Taiwan Independence. But given the pro and con forces within the party, it cannot.
There is an old saying. "It is easy to eliminate the brigands hiding in the mountains. It is difficult to eliminate the evil hiding within one's heart." The DPP overthrew the Kuomintang regime in 2000. Ever since it passed its 1999 "Resolution on Taiwan's Future," it has been struggling to jettison Taiwan independence. Alas, Taiwan independence continues to bind it hand and foot, making it impossible to stand. As the title of this article notes, jettisoning Taiwan independence is harder than overthrowing a regime.
Chen Shui-bian won the presidential election in 2000, in part because of the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" apparently jettisoned the party's Taiwan independence stance. But once it assumed power, Taiwan independence returned to haunt the party. Either that, or the DPP used Taiwan independence to manipulate the strategic picture. A look back proves that the DPP was merely pretending to jettison Taiwan independence in order to win the presidential election. It had no intention of jettisoning Taiwan independence. Today, the DPP longs to return to power. Once again it has floated all sorts of proposals to jettison Taiwan independence. These include Su Tseng-chang's "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." They include Frank Hsieh's "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. They include Ker Chien-ming's "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." But these are merely electioneering tricks. Their real purpose is to enable the DPP to return to power. The DPP will never change its Taiwan independence spots.
DPP factions are currently engaged in internal strife. The impression they are giving the outside world is that the DPP simply cannot jettison its Taiwan independence stance. Recall the problems encountered by Chen Shui-bian before and after he was elected in 2000. They led to the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." Under party chairman Lin Yi-hsiung, the process was characterized as smooth. But today's DPP has already "tasted bitterness." The Chen Shui-bian administration remained bound by the shackles of Taiwan independence for eight long years. Tsai Ing-wen lost in 2012 because she repudiated the 1992 consensus. The party includes people who say "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." It includes people who propose "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." But their position has not become a consensus within the party. As the title of this article implied, "It is easy to eliminate the brigands hiding in the mountains. It is difficult to eliminate the evil hiding within one's heart." It was easy to overthrow a pro-Taiwan independence DPP regime. But it is not so easy to persuade the DPP to jettison Taiwan independence.
Taiwan independence affects the international strategic picture. It affects the Republic of China's strategic survival. Yet the DPP has reduced it an electioneering ploy to enable its return to power. Suppose the DPP jettisons its Taiwan independence stance and is reelected? Will that fool Washington? Will that fool Beijing? In particular will that fool awakend voters? This was the bitter experience endured by the nation between 2000, when the DPP rose to power, and 2008, when the DPP fell from grace. Does the nation really wish to repeat this tragedy in 2016?
The DPP is immobilized by the shackles of Taiwan independence. it can neither advance nor retreat. In 2000, Taiwan independence granted Chen Shui-bian a grace period. The Taiwan independence forces that Su Tseng-chang currently faces are not so reasonable. The DPP must not pretend to jettison Taiwan independence as an electioneering ploy. It must in fact jettison Taiwan independence to ensure Taiwan's survival. Does the DPP really intend to ride Taiwan independence to power in 2016, only to ride Taiwan independence from power in 2020? Taiwan is unlikely to survive the ordeal.
The DPP is about to announce its "China policy." It must not allow the public to see its inadequacies and its dilemma.
甩掉台獨 比推翻一個政權還難
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.01.06 02:32 am
民進黨可能在九日公布其「對中政策」，最受矚目的表徵自是在如何與台獨切割。
蘇貞昌說「不必再回頭搞台獨」，謝長廷倡議「憲法各表」，柯建銘主張「凍結台獨黨綱」；在在顯示，民進黨內的一些要角已有「台獨再也玩不下去」的覺悟。這次「對中政策」發布，大家都在等著看民進黨如何處理這隻台獨包袱。
其實，在四十餘年前，台獨勢力或明或暗地進入台灣民主運動之際，我們即預言其不是可大可久；然而，解嚴後，民進黨在一九九一年正式發布《台獨黨綱》，自此民進黨就成了旗幟鮮明的台獨黨，其氣焰最盛時，甚至逼得國旗在國民黨的選舉集會中銷形匿跡，唯恐讓人看了刺眼，流失選票。但至一九九九年，為部署陳水扁參選總統，民進黨發布《台灣前途決議文》，策略性地擺出「甩掉台獨」的姿態，遂在連、宋分裂的局面下，贏得了執政地位；然而，扁政府上台後，陸委會主委蔡英文逼使陳水扁總統否定了九二共識，隨後民進黨政府又將整個國家捲入「正名制憲」、「入聯公投」等台獨風暴之中。如今，又因二○一二年蔡英文敗於「否定九二共識」，民進黨為了「重返執政」，遂再掀起兩岸政策轉型之議，始有前述蘇貞昌「不回頭搞台獨」、謝長廷「憲法各表」，與柯建銘「凍獨」的眾議紛紜。
然而，跡象顯示，民進黨此次仍不可能跳脫台獨的捆綁，蘇貞昌的「台獨黨綱沒有凍結不凍結的問題」，已經預示了解答。眾所共見，民進黨今日的困局正是：若想「重返執政」，必須跳脫台獨的捆綁；但在黨內正反力量的拉扯下，卻無可能做到。
語云：「去山中賊易，去心中賊難。」民進黨曾在二○○○年推翻了國民黨政權，但自一九九九年《台灣前途決議文》嘗試擺脫台獨以來，卻是迄今仍被台獨纏身，無法翻身。這就是本文標題所指：甩掉台獨，比推翻一個政權還難。
陳水扁在二○○○年贏得總統大選，部分是因《台灣前途決議文》擺出了「甩掉台獨」的姿態；但在執政後，台獨又回頭纏住了民進黨，或民進黨又回頭利用台獨元素來操作政局。如今回顧那段歷史，足證民進黨只是利用「甩掉台獨的姿態」來贏得總統大選，卻在黨的體質上根本沒有「甩掉台獨」的可能性。如今，民進黨為了「重返執政」，又出現「擺出甩掉台獨的姿態」之各種主意，包括蘇貞昌的「不回頭」、謝長廷的「憲法各表」與柯建銘的「凍獨」等，其實率皆只是一種「重返執政」的選舉權謀而已，卻無可能是民進黨在台獨體質上的脫胎換骨。
何況，如今民進黨在內部路線及派系的傾軋中，給外界的觀感是甚至連「擺出甩掉台獨的姿態」的能力都沒有。回想陳水扁當年預見二○○○年大選及當選後執政的難題，促成了《台灣前途決議文》的發布，在黨主席林義雄操持下，其過程堪稱十分流暢；但今日的民進黨，明明嘗盡陳水扁執政八年困於台獨枷鎖而走投無路的苦頭，又經歷蔡英文二○一二年敗於「否定九二共識」；但黨內雖有「不回頭」與「凍獨」的去獨思維，終究不能成為黨內的主流共識。可見，以本文的題旨而言，要在二○○八年推翻玩弄台獨的民進黨政權易（此為山中之賊），卻是要民進黨跳脫台獨的捆綁難（這是心中之賊）。
台獨是一個牽動國際因素、攸關台灣生死存亡的戰略課題，民進黨卻將其矮化成只是一個「重返執政」的選舉權謀工具。即使民進黨作出「甩掉台獨包袱的姿態」贏得了選舉，但騙得了美國嗎？騙得了北京嗎？尤其，最後騙得了覺醒的選民嗎？這正是民進黨自二○○○至二○○八贏得選舉又失掉政權並敗壞了國家的痛苦經驗，難道如今還想在二○一六年複製悲劇？
面對台獨的捆綁，民進黨已然左支右絀，進退失據。二○○○年陳水扁面對的台獨或尚有幾分賞味期的意思，如今蘇貞昌面對的台獨已是不可理喻。民進黨如果再用「作出甩掉台獨的姿態」為選舉權謀，而不能從「台灣生存戰略」的角度來真正「甩掉台獨」，難道民進黨仍想在二○一六抱著台獨重返執政，然後再在二○二○抱著台獨下台？台灣恐怕再也禁不起這種折騰了。
「對中政策」即將揭曉，民進黨最好不要再讓大家見到左支右絀、進退失據的窘態。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 6, 2014
Summary: The DPP is immobilized by the shackles of Taiwan independence. it can neither advance nor retreat. In 2000, Taiwan independence granted Chen Shui-bian a grace period. The Taiwan independence forces that Su Tseng-chang currently faces are not so reasonable. The DPP must not pretend to jettison Taiwan independence as an electioneering ploy. It must jettison Taiwan independence in fact, to ensure Taiwan's survival. Does the DPP really intend to ride Taiwan independence to power in 2016, only to ride Taiwan independence from power in 2020? Taiwan is unlikely to survive the ordeal.
Full text below:
The DPP is expected to announce its "[Mainland] China Policy" on the 9th. The most closely watched issue is how it will distance itself from Taiwan independence.
Su Tseng-chang said, "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." Frank Hsieh has proposed "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. Ker Chien-ming has proposed "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Platform." Key players within the DPP realize Taiwan independence is a game they can no longer afford to play. Everyone is awaiting the DPP's upcoming "China Policy" announcement. Everyone wants to see how the DPP will deal with the Taiwan independence albatross around its neck.
Over 40 years ago, Taiwan independence overtly and covertly infiltrated the pro-democracy movement. Back then, we predicted that Taiwan independence could neither dominate nor endure. In 1991, following the lifting of martial law, the DPP announced its " Taiwan Independence Party Platform." The DPP became the standard bearer for the Taiwan independence movement. At the height of its arrogance, it cowed the KMT into hiding the ROC national flag during its election rallies, for fear it would result in lost votes. In 1999 however, for the sake of Chen Shui-bian's presidential bid, the DPP issued its "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." It strategically jettisoned its Taiwan independence stance. A split between Lien and Soong supporters enabled Chen to win office. But as soon as Chen took office, MAC Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen pressured President Chen Shui-bian into repudiating the 1992 consensus. The ruling DPP then forced the entire country to participate in its Taiwan independence antics, including the "rectification of names" and the "Referendum on UN membership." Tsai Ing-wen lost her presidential bid in 2012 because she repudidated the 1992 consensus. The DPP longs to return to power. As a result it has begun reforming its cross-strait policy. Su Tseng-chang declared that "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." Frank Hsieh proposed "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. Ker Chien-ming proposed "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." These have all led to controversy.
Indications are however, that the DPP will not be able to free itself from the bonds of Taiwan independence. Su Tseng-chang said "Freezing the Taiwan independence party platform is not under consideration." He has already given us the answer. As everyone can see, the DPP faces a dilemma. If it wants to return to power it must shrug off the shackles of Taiwan Independence. But given the pro and con forces within the party, it cannot.
There is an old saying. "It is easy to eliminate the brigands hiding in the mountains. It is difficult to eliminate the evil hiding within one's heart." The DPP overthrew the Kuomintang regime in 2000. Ever since it passed its 1999 "Resolution on Taiwan's Future," it has been struggling to jettison Taiwan independence. Alas, Taiwan independence continues to bind it hand and foot, making it impossible to stand. As the title of this article notes, jettisoning Taiwan independence is harder than overthrowing a regime.
Chen Shui-bian won the presidential election in 2000, in part because of the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future" apparently jettisoned the party's Taiwan independence stance. But once it assumed power, Taiwan independence returned to haunt the party. Either that, or the DPP used Taiwan independence to manipulate the strategic picture. A look back proves that the DPP was merely pretending to jettison Taiwan independence in order to win the presidential election. It had no intention of jettisoning Taiwan independence. Today, the DPP longs to return to power. Once again it has floated all sorts of proposals to jettison Taiwan independence. These include Su Tseng-chang's "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." They include Frank Hsieh's "Different Constitutional Interpretations" [of "one China"]. They include Ker Chien-ming's "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." But these are merely electioneering tricks. Their real purpose is to enable the DPP to return to power. The DPP will never change its Taiwan independence spots.
DPP factions are currently engaged in internal strife. The impression they are giving the outside world is that the DPP simply cannot jettison its Taiwan independence stance. Recall the problems encountered by Chen Shui-bian before and after he was elected in 2000. They led to the "Resolution on Taiwan's Future." Under party chairman Lin Yi-hsiung, the process was characterized as smooth. But today's DPP has already "tasted bitterness." The Chen Shui-bian administration remained bound by the shackles of Taiwan independence for eight long years. Tsai Ing-wen lost in 2012 because she repudiated the 1992 consensus. The party includes people who say "There is no need to turn the clock back and to engage in Taiwan independence." It includes people who propose "Freezing the Taiwan Independence Party Charter." But their position has not become a consensus within the party. As the title of this article implied, "It is easy to eliminate the brigands hiding in the mountains. It is difficult to eliminate the evil hiding within one's heart." It was easy to overthrow a pro-Taiwan independence DPP regime. But it is not so easy to persuade the DPP to jettison Taiwan independence.
Taiwan independence affects the international strategic picture. It affects the Republic of China's strategic survival. Yet the DPP has reduced it an electioneering ploy to enable its return to power. Suppose the DPP jettisons its Taiwan independence stance and is reelected? Will that fool Washington? Will that fool Beijing? In particular will that fool awakend voters? This was the bitter experience endured by the nation between 2000, when the DPP rose to power, and 2008, when the DPP fell from grace. Does the nation really wish to repeat this tragedy in 2016?
The DPP is immobilized by the shackles of Taiwan independence. it can neither advance nor retreat. In 2000, Taiwan independence granted Chen Shui-bian a grace period. The Taiwan independence forces that Su Tseng-chang currently faces are not so reasonable. The DPP must not pretend to jettison Taiwan independence as an electioneering ploy. It must in fact jettison Taiwan independence to ensure Taiwan's survival. Does the DPP really intend to ride Taiwan independence to power in 2016, only to ride Taiwan independence from power in 2020? Taiwan is unlikely to survive the ordeal.
The DPP is about to announce its "China policy." It must not allow the public to see its inadequacies and its dilemma.
甩掉台獨 比推翻一個政權還難
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.01.06 02:32 am
民進黨可能在九日公布其「對中政策」，最受矚目的表徵自是在如何與台獨切割。
蘇貞昌說「不必再回頭搞台獨」，謝長廷倡議「憲法各表」，柯建銘主張「凍結台獨黨綱」；在在顯示，民進黨內的一些要角已有「台獨再也玩不下去」的覺悟。這次「對中政策」發布，大家都在等著看民進黨如何處理這隻台獨包袱。
其實，在四十餘年前，台獨勢力或明或暗地進入台灣民主運動之際，我們即預言其不是可大可久；然而，解嚴後，民進黨在一九九一年正式發布《台獨黨綱》，自此民進黨就成了旗幟鮮明的台獨黨，其氣焰最盛時，甚至逼得國旗在國民黨的選舉集會中銷形匿跡，唯恐讓人看了刺眼，流失選票。但至一九九九年，為部署陳水扁參選總統，民進黨發布《台灣前途決議文》，策略性地擺出「甩掉台獨」的姿態，遂在連、宋分裂的局面下，贏得了執政地位；然而，扁政府上台後，陸委會主委蔡英文逼使陳水扁總統否定了九二共識，隨後民進黨政府又將整個國家捲入「正名制憲」、「入聯公投」等台獨風暴之中。如今，又因二○一二年蔡英文敗於「否定九二共識」，民進黨為了「重返執政」，遂再掀起兩岸政策轉型之議，始有前述蘇貞昌「不回頭搞台獨」、謝長廷「憲法各表」，與柯建銘「凍獨」的眾議紛紜。
然而，跡象顯示，民進黨此次仍不可能跳脫台獨的捆綁，蘇貞昌的「台獨黨綱沒有凍結不凍結的問題」，已經預示了解答。眾所共見，民進黨今日的困局正是：若想「重返執政」，必須跳脫台獨的捆綁；但在黨內正反力量的拉扯下，卻無可能做到。
語云：「去山中賊易，去心中賊難。」民進黨曾在二○○○年推翻了國民黨政權，但自一九九九年《台灣前途決議文》嘗試擺脫台獨以來，卻是迄今仍被台獨纏身，無法翻身。這就是本文標題所指：甩掉台獨，比推翻一個政權還難。
陳水扁在二○○○年贏得總統大選，部分是因《台灣前途決議文》擺出了「甩掉台獨」的姿態；但在執政後，台獨又回頭纏住了民進黨，或民進黨又回頭利用台獨元素來操作政局。如今回顧那段歷史，足證民進黨只是利用「甩掉台獨的姿態」來贏得總統大選，卻在黨的體質上根本沒有「甩掉台獨」的可能性。如今，民進黨為了「重返執政」，又出現「擺出甩掉台獨的姿態」之各種主意，包括蘇貞昌的「不回頭」、謝長廷的「憲法各表」與柯建銘的「凍獨」等，其實率皆只是一種「重返執政」的選舉權謀而已，卻無可能是民進黨在台獨體質上的脫胎換骨。
何況，如今民進黨在內部路線及派系的傾軋中，給外界的觀感是甚至連「擺出甩掉台獨的姿態」的能力都沒有。回想陳水扁當年預見二○○○年大選及當選後執政的難題，促成了《台灣前途決議文》的發布，在黨主席林義雄操持下，其過程堪稱十分流暢；但今日的民進黨，明明嘗盡陳水扁執政八年困於台獨枷鎖而走投無路的苦頭，又經歷蔡英文二○一二年敗於「否定九二共識」；但黨內雖有「不回頭」與「凍獨」的去獨思維，終究不能成為黨內的主流共識。可見，以本文的題旨而言，要在二○○八年推翻玩弄台獨的民進黨政權易（此為山中之賊），卻是要民進黨跳脫台獨的捆綁難（這是心中之賊）。
台獨是一個牽動國際因素、攸關台灣生死存亡的戰略課題，民進黨卻將其矮化成只是一個「重返執政」的選舉權謀工具。即使民進黨作出「甩掉台獨包袱的姿態」贏得了選舉，但騙得了美國嗎？騙得了北京嗎？尤其，最後騙得了覺醒的選民嗎？這正是民進黨自二○○○至二○○八贏得選舉又失掉政權並敗壞了國家的痛苦經驗，難道如今還想在二○一六年複製悲劇？
面對台獨的捆綁，民進黨已然左支右絀，進退失據。二○○○年陳水扁面對的台獨或尚有幾分賞味期的意思，如今蘇貞昌面對的台獨已是不可理喻。民進黨如果再用「作出甩掉台獨的姿態」為選舉權謀，而不能從「台灣生存戰略」的角度來真正「甩掉台獨」，難道民進黨仍想在二○一六抱著台獨重返執政，然後再在二○二○抱著台獨下台？台灣恐怕再也禁不起這種折騰了。
「對中政策」即將揭曉，民進黨最好不要再讓大家見到左支右絀、進退失據的窘態。
Thursday, January 2, 2014
Economic Revitalization Requires Both Liberalization and Net Mending
Economic Revitalization Requires Both Liberalization and Net Mending
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 3, 2014
Summary: The Ma administration's open-door policy can not be divorced from reality. The government must come up with policies to solve urgent issues affecting peoples livelihood. It must encourage investments to enhance industrial competitiveness. It must eliminate internal and external political resistance. Only then can the economy survive. We hope the Ma administration will take these to heart and make the proper policy adjustments.
Full text below:
On New Year's day, President Ma Ying-jeou called for "national unity for the sake of economic revitalization." He said that this year the government would focus on one thing, "national unity for the sake of economic revitalization." The domestic economy has remained stalled for years. People have less and less faith in the government. President Ma's remarks were his response to public expectations. For years, people have watched as the government struggled to revive the economy. Besides promoting new policies and mending nets, the government must also rekindle hope.
Ma has been in office for nearly six years. His most important policy has been to liberalize the economy. He hoped to revive Taiwan's economy. by breaking the stranglehold the DPP's eight year long closed door policy had on the island. This policy change, especially the breakthrough in the cross-strait status quo, brought Taiwan a multitude of opportunities for economic growth. It also brought unprecedented challenges. Confronted with this new situation, Taiwan needs a stable internal and external environment. It needs visionaries who are able to implement their visions.
Unfortunately the global economy underwent a huge change in recent years. The liberalization of cross-Strait policy has been hampered by Blue vs. Green ideological conflict. Also, the government's policies had structural defects. These undermined the government's ability to respond to changes and to shape its vision. As a result Taiwan was brought to the brink of economic crisis.
We realize that President Ma and his cabinet feel frustrated and unappreciated. But effective economic governance requires confronting illnesses and prescribing remedies. The Ma administration has consistently adhered to liberalization. Now it must also mend nets in order to regain public confidence, overcome difficulties, and reverse its image of ineptitude.
Taiwan is dependent upon trade. It must remain open to the outside world. Only then will it survive. The Trans-Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement (TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) represent rapid regional integration. Taiwan must adhere to an open-door policy. It must actively participate in regional integration. This is a path it must take. Naturally the Ma administration has made these the focus of its policy. But full liberalization requires more than slogans. One must also confront economic and political realities.
Consider economic reality. A major problem is declining industrial competitiveness. Taiwan's chief export industry is the information and communications industry. This industry is under attack from US, South Korean, and Mainland multinationals. A crisis looms. The petrochemical industry also faces unprecedented challenges from large scale U.S. shale gas exploitation, Domestic industries, including educational services and medical services, are in crisis. The cultural and creative industries are hemorraging talent. Agriculture is in sharp decline. Imports of foreign agricultural products have made food self-sufficiency increasingly infeasible. We face a variety of practical problems. If we emphasize only open markets, that merely deepens industry concerns.
The fact is industry requires long-term competitiveness and continuous investment. It requires research and innovation. The government has a responsibility to create a favorable investment environment and provide incentives. It must shape economic development. In particular, it must offer a cross-Strait economic vision. It must help companies that are willing and eager to invest in Taiwan. President Ma's New Year's Day speech mentioned the Taoyuan Free Trade Zone. He cited it as the key to public investments, expanding cultural and creative financing, venture capital angel funds, and large-scale urban renewal. For the most part, he was plowing old ground. The size and shape of the "Free Trade Zone Pilot Programs" are limited. They are not enough to enhance industrial competitiveness, to enable us to join the TPP, or prepare us for the RCEP. The government must actively and effectively plan for the future and encourage investments.
Also, liberalization alone cannot solve the problem of unemployment. Living wages and misery index increases are matters of peoples livelihood. The government must win peoples hearts as well as their minds. They must answer the question "Where's the beef?" Only then will the people be willing to support liberalization.
Consider political reality. Cross-Strait factors are obstacles to TPP, RCEP, and other forms of regional economic integration. They are also obstacles to the signing of FTAs. Taiwan will find it difficult to join the US led TPP ahead of the Mainland. The RCEP, led by ASEAN and the Chinese mainland, has announced that other countries will not be able to take part in negotiations before 2015. Before the cross-Strait trade in services agreement and commodity trade agreements are implemented, Taiwan and other economies will find it difficult to negotiate and sign FTAs.
Therefore the government must improve communications with social groups and the private sector. It must eliminate internal resistance to the trade in services agreement. It must aggressively negotiate with the Mainland. It must include priority issues into dialogue and negotiations over cross-Strait issues. Taiwan cannot participate in the TPP and RCEP in the short term. Participation is at the discretion of the United States, Japan, and Mainland China. This strengthens Beijing's hand during negotiations.
In short, the open-door policy can not be divorced from reality. The government must come up with policies to solve urgent issues affecting peoples livelihood. It must encourage investments to enhance industrial competitiveness. It must eliminate internal and external political resistance. Only then can the economy survive. We hope the Ma administration will take these to heart and make the proper policy adjustments.
拚經濟的活路：開放與補破網要雙管齊下
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.01.03 04:04 am
馬英九總統以「全民團結拚經濟」為題發表元旦祝詞，宣示今年只有一個重點，就是全民拚經濟。國內經濟連年低迷不振，民間對政府信心日益不足，馬總統以此宣示回應人民的期待；然而，政府連年拚經濟不力的形象已深植人心，在推動新政同時，如何補破網、重振民心也是重要課題。
馬政府執政將近六年，以「開放」作為經濟施政主軸，期待打破民進黨執政八年的「鎖國」政策，為台灣經濟引進活水。此一政策改變，尤其在兩岸現狀的突破，為台灣經濟發展帶來可觀機會，同時也帶來空前挑戰。面對此一新局，台灣不但需要一個穩定的內外大環境，更需要執政者有塑造願景的規劃和執行能力。
遺憾的是，近幾年來適逢國際經濟巨大變局，又因為兩岸開放政策加劇朝野及藍綠對立，再加上馬政府本身結構性的缺陷，嚴重弱化因應變局及開創願景的施政能力，以致讓整個台灣陷入經濟危機的邊緣。
我們可以理解馬總統及內閣團隊的挫折感和不服輸的志氣，但經濟施政的有效推動首須面對問題、對症下藥，現在馬政府最需要的是為一貫堅持的「開放」政策進行補破網工程，才能重拾民眾信心，突破困境，扭轉施政無能的形象。
台灣以貿易立國，對外愈是開放，才愈有出路。面對「跨太平洋經濟夥伴協定」（ＴＰＰ）、「區域全面經濟夥伴協定」（ＲＣＥＰ）等區域整合快速發展，台灣堅持開放政策，積極參與區域整合，是必須走的一條大道，馬政府將其列為施政重心乃理所當然。但是台灣走向全面開放之路，不能光靠口號，而須面對解決經濟和政治兩方面的現實。
在經濟現實方面，產業競爭力持續衰退是首要問題。台灣主力出口產業資通訊業在美、韓國際大廠及大陸業者兩路夾擊下，危機迫在眉睫；石化業因為美國頁岩氣大量開採，亦面臨前所未有的挑戰；內需產業包括教育服務業、醫療服務業等皆危機重重；文創產業人才大量流失，後繼乏力；農業因糧食自給率大幅下降及進口外國農產品競爭，永續經營日益困難。種種現實難題若不面對解決，只是一味強調市場開放，反容易加深業者及從業人員的憂慮。
事實上，產業長期競爭力須賴不斷的投資和研發創新來提升，政府有責任營造良好投資環境及提供誘因，並形塑未來經濟發展尤其是兩岸經貿的願景，讓企業願意也樂於投資台灣。馬總統元旦文告提出以桃園自由貿易港區為核心的公共投資、擴大文創融資及成立創業天使基金，以及大規模土地活化與都市更新，多屬老菜新炒；「自由經濟示範區」計畫的規模及格局亦屬有限；皆不足以承擔全面提升產業競爭力、為加入ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ作準備的重任，亟需政府更積極有力地為未來經濟布局，以促進全面性的投資。
再者，開放不能解決就業、薪資及人民生活痛苦指數升高等民生問題；所以，政府也須拿出可以讓人民心動、有感的政策牛肉，才能讓人民樂於支持開放。
在政治現實方面，兩岸因素是台灣參與ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ等區域經濟整合乃至對外洽簽ＦＴＡ的阻力。台灣很難先於大陸加入由美國主導的ＴＰＰ；由東協和中國大陸主導的ＲＣＥＰ已宣布在二○一五年前不開放其他國家參與談判。在兩岸服務貿易協議及貨品貿易協議落實執行前，台灣很難進一步開展和其他國家洽簽ＦＴＡ。
因此，政府除須和社會及民意部門加強溝通及協調，全力排除服貿協議乃至貨貿協議在國內的阻力外，也須積極和大陸斡旋，將相關議題納入兩岸對話和協商的優先議題。同時，台灣也須有短期內無法參與ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ的因應備案，並審酌對美、日、大陸三方面的槓桿關係，強化和北京談判的能力。
總之，開放政策不能脫離現實，拿出政策牛肉解決迫切民生問題，全面促進投資提升產業競爭力，並以積極行動作排除開放的內外政治阻力，才是拚經濟的活路。盼馬政府能深切體認，並作出有力的政策調整。
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 3, 2014
Summary: The Ma administration's open-door policy can not be divorced from reality. The government must come up with policies to solve urgent issues affecting peoples livelihood. It must encourage investments to enhance industrial competitiveness. It must eliminate internal and external political resistance. Only then can the economy survive. We hope the Ma administration will take these to heart and make the proper policy adjustments.
Full text below:
On New Year's day, President Ma Ying-jeou called for "national unity for the sake of economic revitalization." He said that this year the government would focus on one thing, "national unity for the sake of economic revitalization." The domestic economy has remained stalled for years. People have less and less faith in the government. President Ma's remarks were his response to public expectations. For years, people have watched as the government struggled to revive the economy. Besides promoting new policies and mending nets, the government must also rekindle hope.
Ma has been in office for nearly six years. His most important policy has been to liberalize the economy. He hoped to revive Taiwan's economy. by breaking the stranglehold the DPP's eight year long closed door policy had on the island. This policy change, especially the breakthrough in the cross-strait status quo, brought Taiwan a multitude of opportunities for economic growth. It also brought unprecedented challenges. Confronted with this new situation, Taiwan needs a stable internal and external environment. It needs visionaries who are able to implement their visions.
Unfortunately the global economy underwent a huge change in recent years. The liberalization of cross-Strait policy has been hampered by Blue vs. Green ideological conflict. Also, the government's policies had structural defects. These undermined the government's ability to respond to changes and to shape its vision. As a result Taiwan was brought to the brink of economic crisis.
We realize that President Ma and his cabinet feel frustrated and unappreciated. But effective economic governance requires confronting illnesses and prescribing remedies. The Ma administration has consistently adhered to liberalization. Now it must also mend nets in order to regain public confidence, overcome difficulties, and reverse its image of ineptitude.
Taiwan is dependent upon trade. It must remain open to the outside world. Only then will it survive. The Trans-Pacific Economic Partnership Agreement (TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) represent rapid regional integration. Taiwan must adhere to an open-door policy. It must actively participate in regional integration. This is a path it must take. Naturally the Ma administration has made these the focus of its policy. But full liberalization requires more than slogans. One must also confront economic and political realities.
Consider economic reality. A major problem is declining industrial competitiveness. Taiwan's chief export industry is the information and communications industry. This industry is under attack from US, South Korean, and Mainland multinationals. A crisis looms. The petrochemical industry also faces unprecedented challenges from large scale U.S. shale gas exploitation, Domestic industries, including educational services and medical services, are in crisis. The cultural and creative industries are hemorraging talent. Agriculture is in sharp decline. Imports of foreign agricultural products have made food self-sufficiency increasingly infeasible. We face a variety of practical problems. If we emphasize only open markets, that merely deepens industry concerns.
The fact is industry requires long-term competitiveness and continuous investment. It requires research and innovation. The government has a responsibility to create a favorable investment environment and provide incentives. It must shape economic development. In particular, it must offer a cross-Strait economic vision. It must help companies that are willing and eager to invest in Taiwan. President Ma's New Year's Day speech mentioned the Taoyuan Free Trade Zone. He cited it as the key to public investments, expanding cultural and creative financing, venture capital angel funds, and large-scale urban renewal. For the most part, he was plowing old ground. The size and shape of the "Free Trade Zone Pilot Programs" are limited. They are not enough to enhance industrial competitiveness, to enable us to join the TPP, or prepare us for the RCEP. The government must actively and effectively plan for the future and encourage investments.
Also, liberalization alone cannot solve the problem of unemployment. Living wages and misery index increases are matters of peoples livelihood. The government must win peoples hearts as well as their minds. They must answer the question "Where's the beef?" Only then will the people be willing to support liberalization.
Consider political reality. Cross-Strait factors are obstacles to TPP, RCEP, and other forms of regional economic integration. They are also obstacles to the signing of FTAs. Taiwan will find it difficult to join the US led TPP ahead of the Mainland. The RCEP, led by ASEAN and the Chinese mainland, has announced that other countries will not be able to take part in negotiations before 2015. Before the cross-Strait trade in services agreement and commodity trade agreements are implemented, Taiwan and other economies will find it difficult to negotiate and sign FTAs.
Therefore the government must improve communications with social groups and the private sector. It must eliminate internal resistance to the trade in services agreement. It must aggressively negotiate with the Mainland. It must include priority issues into dialogue and negotiations over cross-Strait issues. Taiwan cannot participate in the TPP and RCEP in the short term. Participation is at the discretion of the United States, Japan, and Mainland China. This strengthens Beijing's hand during negotiations.
In short, the open-door policy can not be divorced from reality. The government must come up with policies to solve urgent issues affecting peoples livelihood. It must encourage investments to enhance industrial competitiveness. It must eliminate internal and external political resistance. Only then can the economy survive. We hope the Ma administration will take these to heart and make the proper policy adjustments.
拚經濟的活路：開放與補破網要雙管齊下
【聯合報╱社論】
2014.01.03 04:04 am
馬英九總統以「全民團結拚經濟」為題發表元旦祝詞，宣示今年只有一個重點，就是全民拚經濟。國內經濟連年低迷不振，民間對政府信心日益不足，馬總統以此宣示回應人民的期待；然而，政府連年拚經濟不力的形象已深植人心，在推動新政同時，如何補破網、重振民心也是重要課題。
馬政府執政將近六年，以「開放」作為經濟施政主軸，期待打破民進黨執政八年的「鎖國」政策，為台灣經濟引進活水。此一政策改變，尤其在兩岸現狀的突破，為台灣經濟發展帶來可觀機會，同時也帶來空前挑戰。面對此一新局，台灣不但需要一個穩定的內外大環境，更需要執政者有塑造願景的規劃和執行能力。
遺憾的是，近幾年來適逢國際經濟巨大變局，又因為兩岸開放政策加劇朝野及藍綠對立，再加上馬政府本身結構性的缺陷，嚴重弱化因應變局及開創願景的施政能力，以致讓整個台灣陷入經濟危機的邊緣。
我們可以理解馬總統及內閣團隊的挫折感和不服輸的志氣，但經濟施政的有效推動首須面對問題、對症下藥，現在馬政府最需要的是為一貫堅持的「開放」政策進行補破網工程，才能重拾民眾信心，突破困境，扭轉施政無能的形象。
台灣以貿易立國，對外愈是開放，才愈有出路。面對「跨太平洋經濟夥伴協定」（ＴＰＰ）、「區域全面經濟夥伴協定」（ＲＣＥＰ）等區域整合快速發展，台灣堅持開放政策，積極參與區域整合，是必須走的一條大道，馬政府將其列為施政重心乃理所當然。但是台灣走向全面開放之路，不能光靠口號，而須面對解決經濟和政治兩方面的現實。
在經濟現實方面，產業競爭力持續衰退是首要問題。台灣主力出口產業資通訊業在美、韓國際大廠及大陸業者兩路夾擊下，危機迫在眉睫；石化業因為美國頁岩氣大量開採，亦面臨前所未有的挑戰；內需產業包括教育服務業、醫療服務業等皆危機重重；文創產業人才大量流失，後繼乏力；農業因糧食自給率大幅下降及進口外國農產品競爭，永續經營日益困難。種種現實難題若不面對解決，只是一味強調市場開放，反容易加深業者及從業人員的憂慮。
事實上，產業長期競爭力須賴不斷的投資和研發創新來提升，政府有責任營造良好投資環境及提供誘因，並形塑未來經濟發展尤其是兩岸經貿的願景，讓企業願意也樂於投資台灣。馬總統元旦文告提出以桃園自由貿易港區為核心的公共投資、擴大文創融資及成立創業天使基金，以及大規模土地活化與都市更新，多屬老菜新炒；「自由經濟示範區」計畫的規模及格局亦屬有限；皆不足以承擔全面提升產業競爭力、為加入ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ作準備的重任，亟需政府更積極有力地為未來經濟布局，以促進全面性的投資。
再者，開放不能解決就業、薪資及人民生活痛苦指數升高等民生問題；所以，政府也須拿出可以讓人民心動、有感的政策牛肉，才能讓人民樂於支持開放。
在政治現實方面，兩岸因素是台灣參與ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ等區域經濟整合乃至對外洽簽ＦＴＡ的阻力。台灣很難先於大陸加入由美國主導的ＴＰＰ；由東協和中國大陸主導的ＲＣＥＰ已宣布在二○一五年前不開放其他國家參與談判。在兩岸服務貿易協議及貨品貿易協議落實執行前，台灣很難進一步開展和其他國家洽簽ＦＴＡ。
因此，政府除須和社會及民意部門加強溝通及協調，全力排除服貿協議乃至貨貿協議在國內的阻力外，也須積極和大陸斡旋，將相關議題納入兩岸對話和協商的優先議題。同時，台灣也須有短期內無法參與ＴＰＰ、ＲＣＥＰ的因應備案，並審酌對美、日、大陸三方面的槓桿關係，強化和北京談判的能力。
總之，開放政策不能脫離現實，拿出政策牛肉解決迫切民生問題，全面促進投資提升產業競爭力，並以積極行動作排除開放的內外政治阻力，才是拚經濟的活路。盼馬政府能深切體認，並作出有力的政策調整。
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Peace and Prosperity Require Sino-Japanese Calm
Peace and Prosperity Require Sino-Japanese Calm
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 2, 2014
Summary: Taiwan and Mainland China are inseparable culturally. They share a common destiny. They also have a deep appreciation for the values of Japan's civil society. We earnestly appeal to Japan. Remove the tablets of WWII war criminals from the shrine. Reflect on your past misdeeds. Mainland China should also demonstrate a more mature and rational attitude. Together we must strive to resolve our differences.
Full text below:
The confrontation between Mainland China and Japan is increasingly fierce. This increases the likelihood of conflict between the two sides. It also casts a shadow over Asian-Pacific peace. These countries have spent a great deal of time and effort to create a stable and prosperous growth environment. But it can be destroyed overnight by reckless action. Mainland China and Japan should calmly resolve their disputes. They should demonstrate a responsible attitude toward national growth and regional stability.
In recent years, frequent clashes have damaged relations between Japan and Mainland China. The proximate cause is the dispute over the sovereignty of the Diaoyutai Islands. For example, when the Japanese government "nationalized" the Diaoyutai Islands, Mainland China responded by conducting routine military patrols through Diaoyutai Island waters. It proclaimed its baselines for an East China Sea ADIZ, and responded in other ways as well.
A few days ago, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe ignored Korean feelings and visited the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, angering the ROK as well. Mainland Chinese State Councilor Yang Jiechi issued a statement. He called on Abe to acknowledge that his visit to the shrine was a blunder. He said Abe's visit had a bearing on the issue of aggression and resistance to aggression, to right and wrong, to light and dark, and to Japan's relations with its Asian neighbors and the international community.
Mainland Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said that Abe slammed the door shut on dialogue with Mainland Chinese leaders. In other words, communication channels between Mainland China and Japan are already closed. If Japan's attitude does not improve, Mainland Chinese leaders will not be holding a summit with Abe.
The last time a currently serving Japanese prime minister visited the Yasukuni Shrine was seven years ago. Junichiro Koizumi's visit worsened Japan's relations with both China and Korea. Later, to reduce tensions, Japanese prime ministers ceased visiting Yasukuni. Abe, alas, is marching down the same ultranationalist path as Koizumi. During his second term, he began taking a hardline militarist path. He increased the military budget. He called for a constitutional amendment and National Defense Program Outline. He is clearly preparing for possible military confrontation.
Actually, far deeper conflicts between China and Japan. underly the Diaoyutai sovereignty dispute.
Historical grievances remain unresolved. Unlike Germany, Japan has never offered a sincere apology for its colonialist past. In recent years, right-wing nationalism and militarism have increased. Attempts have been made to deny the Rape of Nanking, to whitewash Japan's history textbooks and to deny that Japan ever enslaved comfort women. Needless to say, such actions have outraged the victim countries.
The rise of Mainland China is rapidly changing the Asian-Pacific strategic situation. Japan was once first in Asia. Now it has been demoted to second place. Mainland China is challenging the United States' post-war status in the Asian-Pacific region. Japan has long been dependent on the United States. It must consider the prospect that one day Mainland Chinese influence in the Asian-Pacific may overshadow that of the United States. Mainland China may even be able to make an amphibious landing on the Diaoyutai islands. For Japan, that would present an extremely tough challenge. A Mainland Chinese occupation of the Diaoyutai Islands would constitute a major humiliation against Japan's national dignity.
The historical feud must be settled justly. The political map of Asia will surely undergo a major re-shuffle. But these issues need not be settled through conflict. Many major international controversies have been resolved through consultation and dialogue. Nearly 70 years of post-war peace and stability have enabled the Asian-Pacific countries to grow strong. They have enabled them to enrich their people and establish tranquil homelands. Everyone must work together to protect such an environment. They must treasure it. They must not ignore the potential consequences.
Japan must understand why it is constantly being criticized concerning historical grievances. Japan is constantly being criticized because it has stubbornly refused to admit its own wrongdoing. Without sincere repentance, Japan can never be forgiven. Without forgiveness, neither victim nor victimizer, can leave the pain behind. Today's Japan is not being criticized because its military is not sufficiently strong. Japan's stubborn determination to strengthen its military, is not going to improve Japan's relations with its Asian neighbors. It will only reawaken hatred of Japanese militarism.
Mainland China has undergone reform and liberalization. Its economy is growing by leaps and bounds. It has successfully maintained stable growth. This is rare in history. Among developing economies Mainland China still needs catching up. This is an important stage of its growth. Ethnic sentiments must not be allowed to precipitate Sino-Japanese conflict and frustrate the pace of progress. A peaceful and stable environment will contribute to Asian-Pacific prosperity. It also constitutes the basis for Mainland China's rapid economic growth. Domestic problems beleager the Mainland.. The last thing the Mainland needs is impatience in its relations with Japan.
As Xi Jinping noted, the Pacific Ocean is big enough to accommodate both the United States and China. In fact, Asia is big enough to accommodate both China and Japan, as well as other Asian countries. The Asian-Pacific countries have similar cultures. They are located close to each other. They enjoy frequent exchanges. There is nothing they cannot sit down and talk over. Where there is a will, there is a way. There is no need for a zero sum game. Everyone can create and share prosperity and progress.
Taiwan and Mainland China are inseparable culturally. They share a common destiny. They also have a deep appreciation for the values of Japan's civil society. We earnestly appeal to Japan. Remove the tablets of WWII war criminals from the shrine. Reflect on your past misdeeds. Mainland China should also demonstrate a more mature and rational attitude. Together we must strive to resolve our differences.
社論－和平繁榮為尚 盼中日冷靜自持
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊
2014年01月02日 04:09
中日之間對立日趨激烈，不但讓雙方爆發衝突的可能性提高，也為亞太和平投下陰影。一個安定繁榮的發展環境，是相關國家耗費許多心力時間才打造成熟的，卻可能一夕間被輕率魯莽的行動所破壞。中日兩國都應該冷靜化解爭執，為國家發展及區域安定展現負責態度。
近年來，在頻頻相互刺激下，日本與中國的關係不斷惡化。直接引爆爭議的導火線是釣魚台主權之爭，例如日本政府將釣魚台國有化之後，中國大陸便以船艦軍機「例行性」巡防釣魚台海域、發布領海基線及東海防空別區等動作反制。
而日前日本首相安倍晉三不顧中、韓觀感，堅持參拜深受爭議的靖國神社，也進一步刺激了中、韓兩國。中國大陸國務委員楊潔篪發表談話，除了要求安倍承認錯誤，並指出這是關乎侵略與反侵略、正義與邪惡、光明與黑暗的大是大非問題，也關乎日本同亞洲鄰國和國際社會關係政治基礎的重大原則。
中國外交部發言人秦剛則接著表示，安倍自己關閉了與中國領導人對話的大門。這意味著中國已經切斷與日本領袖的對話管道，如果日方態度沒有改善，中方領導人不會與安倍舉行高峰會。
距離上次日本現任首相參拜靖國神社已有7年之久，之前是小泉純一郎，當時引發日本與中、韓關係惡化，之後為了降低緊張，日本首相便一直不曾參拜靖國。而今和小泉同樣走右傾國家主義路線的安倍，卻在二度執政後，開始採取強硬的建軍強國路線，增加軍事預算、推動修憲、修改防衛大綱等等動作，都明顯在為未來可能的軍事狀況作準備。
其實在釣魚台主權之爭的背後，中日之間還有更深刻巨大的矛盾。
往回看，歷史的恩怨未解，因為日本不但沒有像德國一樣真心誠意地懺悔侵略殖民的過往，近年來更在右派民族主義與軍國主義的民粹聲浪中，出現試圖否定南京大屠殺、在教科書中淡化歷史過錯、不承認強徵慰安婦等行徑，受害國當然無法忍受這種無恥的作為。
而向前看，中國的崛起正迅速改變亞太局勢，日本過去亞洲一哥的地位已經退居第二，美國在戰後主導亞太的優勢也將受到中國的強烈挑戰。長期倚靠美國的日本，必須慎重思考有朝一日中國在亞太的影響力將凌駕美國，甚至有能力對釣魚台進行奪島攻擊。對日本來說，那將是極為嚴峻的挑戰；萬一中國占領釣魚台，更是國家尊嚴的重大羞辱。
然而，歷史的宿怨固然必須還一個公道，未來亞太政治版圖也必然重新洗牌，不過，這些議題都不必然要訴諸衝突手段才能處理。國際間許多重大爭議，都曾以協商對話的方式得到化解。戰後近70年的和平安定，讓亞太國家得以穩健發展，為各國民眾打造平靜富足的家園。這樣一個環境，值得大家攜手共同呵護，其中的成員都應該加以珍惜，不能不顧後果地逞意氣之快。
日本必須理解，自己之所以不斷在歷史恩怨上受到抨擊，就是因為不願正視曾經犯下的錯誤。沒有真心悔悟，就不會得到原諒；沒有原諒，無論是對被害人還是加害人，傷痛都不會過去。今天日本不是因為軍力不夠強才會頻頻遭到追究，所以，執意強化軍事發展，不但不會改善日本與亞洲鄰國的關係，還會喚醒對日本軍國主義的憎恨。
在另一方面，中國大陸自從改革開放以來，經濟順利成長，正順利推動著歷史上少見的穩定發展。和開發中國家相較，大陸在許多方面都還需要急起直追，在這個成長的重要階段，不應該讓中日衝突挑起的民族情緒牽著政策走，而讓前進的步伐出現頓挫。一個和平安定的環境，不只有助於亞太共榮，更是大陸國家躍進之依憑，在國內各項事務千頭萬緒之際，實在沒有必要在對日關係上過度強悍躁進。
正如習近平所說，太平洋夠大，足以容納美國與中國。其實亞洲也夠大，足以容納中國與日本，以及所有其他亞洲國家；亞太國家文化接近、交流頻繁，沒什麼不能坐下來好好說的。只要心夠大，空間就無限寬廣，不需要再有你無我或你勝我負。繁榮進步的果實，可以共同創造，更可以一起分享。
台灣與中國大陸有不可分割的文化血緣關係及共同的命運，與日本也有深厚的民間感情與接近的價值觀，我們誠摯呼籲日本，應將二戰聯軍軍事法庭判決戰犯罪的神位遷出靖國神社，藉此反省歷史錯誤，中國大陸也可展現更成熟理性的態度，共同努力化解彼此的歧見。
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China)
A Translation
January 2, 2014
Summary: Taiwan and Mainland China are inseparable culturally. They share a common destiny. They also have a deep appreciation for the values of Japan's civil society. We earnestly appeal to Japan. Remove the tablets of WWII war criminals from the shrine. Reflect on your past misdeeds. Mainland China should also demonstrate a more mature and rational attitude. Together we must strive to resolve our differences.
Full text below:
The confrontation between Mainland China and Japan is increasingly fierce. This increases the likelihood of conflict between the two sides. It also casts a shadow over Asian-Pacific peace. These countries have spent a great deal of time and effort to create a stable and prosperous growth environment. But it can be destroyed overnight by reckless action. Mainland China and Japan should calmly resolve their disputes. They should demonstrate a responsible attitude toward national growth and regional stability.
In recent years, frequent clashes have damaged relations between Japan and Mainland China. The proximate cause is the dispute over the sovereignty of the Diaoyutai Islands. For example, when the Japanese government "nationalized" the Diaoyutai Islands, Mainland China responded by conducting routine military patrols through Diaoyutai Island waters. It proclaimed its baselines for an East China Sea ADIZ, and responded in other ways as well.
A few days ago, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe ignored Korean feelings and visited the controversial Yasukuni Shrine, angering the ROK as well. Mainland Chinese State Councilor Yang Jiechi issued a statement. He called on Abe to acknowledge that his visit to the shrine was a blunder. He said Abe's visit had a bearing on the issue of aggression and resistance to aggression, to right and wrong, to light and dark, and to Japan's relations with its Asian neighbors and the international community.
Mainland Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said that Abe slammed the door shut on dialogue with Mainland Chinese leaders. In other words, communication channels between Mainland China and Japan are already closed. If Japan's attitude does not improve, Mainland Chinese leaders will not be holding a summit with Abe.
The last time a currently serving Japanese prime minister visited the Yasukuni Shrine was seven years ago. Junichiro Koizumi's visit worsened Japan's relations with both China and Korea. Later, to reduce tensions, Japanese prime ministers ceased visiting Yasukuni. Abe, alas, is marching down the same ultranationalist path as Koizumi. During his second term, he began taking a hardline militarist path. He increased the military budget. He called for a constitutional amendment and National Defense Program Outline. He is clearly preparing for possible military confrontation.
Actually, far deeper conflicts between China and Japan. underly the Diaoyutai sovereignty dispute.
Historical grievances remain unresolved. Unlike Germany, Japan has never offered a sincere apology for its colonialist past. In recent years, right-wing nationalism and militarism have increased. Attempts have been made to deny the Rape of Nanking, to whitewash Japan's history textbooks and to deny that Japan ever enslaved comfort women. Needless to say, such actions have outraged the victim countries.
The rise of Mainland China is rapidly changing the Asian-Pacific strategic situation. Japan was once first in Asia. Now it has been demoted to second place. Mainland China is challenging the United States' post-war status in the Asian-Pacific region. Japan has long been dependent on the United States. It must consider the prospect that one day Mainland Chinese influence in the Asian-Pacific may overshadow that of the United States. Mainland China may even be able to make an amphibious landing on the Diaoyutai islands. For Japan, that would present an extremely tough challenge. A Mainland Chinese occupation of the Diaoyutai Islands would constitute a major humiliation against Japan's national dignity.
The historical feud must be settled justly. The political map of Asia will surely undergo a major re-shuffle. But these issues need not be settled through conflict. Many major international controversies have been resolved through consultation and dialogue. Nearly 70 years of post-war peace and stability have enabled the Asian-Pacific countries to grow strong. They have enabled them to enrich their people and establish tranquil homelands. Everyone must work together to protect such an environment. They must treasure it. They must not ignore the potential consequences.
Japan must understand why it is constantly being criticized concerning historical grievances. Japan is constantly being criticized because it has stubbornly refused to admit its own wrongdoing. Without sincere repentance, Japan can never be forgiven. Without forgiveness, neither victim nor victimizer, can leave the pain behind. Today's Japan is not being criticized because its military is not sufficiently strong. Japan's stubborn determination to strengthen its military, is not going to improve Japan's relations with its Asian neighbors. It will only reawaken hatred of Japanese militarism.
Mainland China has undergone reform and liberalization. Its economy is growing by leaps and bounds. It has successfully maintained stable growth. This is rare in history. Among developing economies Mainland China still needs catching up. This is an important stage of its growth. Ethnic sentiments must not be allowed to precipitate Sino-Japanese conflict and frustrate the pace of progress. A peaceful and stable environment will contribute to Asian-Pacific prosperity. It also constitutes the basis for Mainland China's rapid economic growth. Domestic problems beleager the Mainland.. The last thing the Mainland needs is impatience in its relations with Japan.
As Xi Jinping noted, the Pacific Ocean is big enough to accommodate both the United States and China. In fact, Asia is big enough to accommodate both China and Japan, as well as other Asian countries. The Asian-Pacific countries have similar cultures. They are located close to each other. They enjoy frequent exchanges. There is nothing they cannot sit down and talk over. Where there is a will, there is a way. There is no need for a zero sum game. Everyone can create and share prosperity and progress.
Taiwan and Mainland China are inseparable culturally. They share a common destiny. They also have a deep appreciation for the values of Japan's civil society. We earnestly appeal to Japan. Remove the tablets of WWII war criminals from the shrine. Reflect on your past misdeeds. Mainland China should also demonstrate a more mature and rational attitude. Together we must strive to resolve our differences.
社論－和平繁榮為尚 盼中日冷靜自持
稍後再讀
中國時報 本報訊
2014年01月02日 04:09
中日之間對立日趨激烈，不但讓雙方爆發衝突的可能性提高，也為亞太和平投下陰影。一個安定繁榮的發展環境，是相關國家耗費許多心力時間才打造成熟的，卻可能一夕間被輕率魯莽的行動所破壞。中日兩國都應該冷靜化解爭執，為國家發展及區域安定展現負責態度。
近年來，在頻頻相互刺激下，日本與中國的關係不斷惡化。直接引爆爭議的導火線是釣魚台主權之爭，例如日本政府將釣魚台國有化之後，中國大陸便以船艦軍機「例行性」巡防釣魚台海域、發布領海基線及東海防空別區等動作反制。
而日前日本首相安倍晉三不顧中、韓觀感，堅持參拜深受爭議的靖國神社，也進一步刺激了中、韓兩國。中國大陸國務委員楊潔篪發表談話，除了要求安倍承認錯誤，並指出這是關乎侵略與反侵略、正義與邪惡、光明與黑暗的大是大非問題，也關乎日本同亞洲鄰國和國際社會關係政治基礎的重大原則。
中國外交部發言人秦剛則接著表示，安倍自己關閉了與中國領導人對話的大門。這意味著中國已經切斷與日本領袖的對話管道，如果日方態度沒有改善，中方領導人不會與安倍舉行高峰會。
距離上次日本現任首相參拜靖國神社已有7年之久，之前是小泉純一郎，當時引發日本與中、韓關係惡化，之後為了降低緊張，日本首相便一直不曾參拜靖國。而今和小泉同樣走右傾國家主義路線的安倍，卻在二度執政後，開始採取強硬的建軍強國路線，增加軍事預算、推動修憲、修改防衛大綱等等動作，都明顯在為未來可能的軍事狀況作準備。
其實在釣魚台主權之爭的背後，中日之間還有更深刻巨大的矛盾。
往回看，歷史的恩怨未解，因為日本不但沒有像德國一樣真心誠意地懺悔侵略殖民的過往，近年來更在右派民族主義與軍國主義的民粹聲浪中，出現試圖否定南京大屠殺、在教科書中淡化歷史過錯、不承認強徵慰安婦等行徑，受害國當然無法忍受這種無恥的作為。
而向前看，中國的崛起正迅速改變亞太局勢，日本過去亞洲一哥的地位已經退居第二，美國在戰後主導亞太的優勢也將受到中國的強烈挑戰。長期倚靠美國的日本，必須慎重思考有朝一日中國在亞太的影響力將凌駕美國，甚至有能力對釣魚台進行奪島攻擊。對日本來說，那將是極為嚴峻的挑戰；萬一中國占領釣魚台，更是國家尊嚴的重大羞辱。
然而，歷史的宿怨固然必須還一個公道，未來亞太政治版圖也必然重新洗牌，不過，這些議題都不必然要訴諸衝突手段才能處理。國際間許多重大爭議，都曾以協商對話的方式得到化解。戰後近70年的和平安定，讓亞太國家得以穩健發展，為各國民眾打造平靜富足的家園。這樣一個環境，值得大家攜手共同呵護，其中的成員都應該加以珍惜，不能不顧後果地逞意氣之快。
日本必須理解，自己之所以不斷在歷史恩怨上受到抨擊，就是因為不願正視曾經犯下的錯誤。沒有真心悔悟，就不會得到原諒；沒有原諒，無論是對被害人還是加害人，傷痛都不會過去。今天日本不是因為軍力不夠強才會頻頻遭到追究，所以，執意強化軍事發展，不但不會改善日本與亞洲鄰國的關係，還會喚醒對日本軍國主義的憎恨。
在另一方面，中國大陸自從改革開放以來，經濟順利成長，正順利推動著歷史上少見的穩定發展。和開發中國家相較，大陸在許多方面都還需要急起直追，在這個成長的重要階段，不應該讓中日衝突挑起的民族情緒牽著政策走，而讓前進的步伐出現頓挫。一個和平安定的環境，不只有助於亞太共榮，更是大陸國家躍進之依憑，在國內各項事務千頭萬緒之際，實在沒有必要在對日關係上過度強悍躁進。
正如習近平所說，太平洋夠大，足以容納美國與中國。其實亞洲也夠大，足以容納中國與日本，以及所有其他亞洲國家；亞太國家文化接近、交流頻繁，沒什麼不能坐下來好好說的。只要心夠大，空間就無限寬廣，不需要再有你無我或你勝我負。繁榮進步的果實，可以共同創造，更可以一起分享。
台灣與中國大陸有不可分割的文化血緣關係及共同的命運，與日本也有深厚的民間感情與接近的價值觀，我們誠摯呼籲日本，應將二戰聯軍軍事法庭判決戰犯罪的神位遷出靖國神社，藉此反省歷史錯誤，中國大陸也可展現更成熟理性的態度，共同努力化解彼此的歧見。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)