Ko Wen-je Squeaks By, Tsai Ing-wen Remains in the Cold

Ko Wen-je Squeaks By, Tsai Ing-wen Remains in the Cold
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 11, 2015

Executive Summary: The Taipei-Shanghai "Twin Cities Forum" will convene in Shanghai on the 17th. Ko Wen-je will personally head a delegation and attend. Zhang Zhijun, Director of the Mainland Taiwan Affairs Office, said he "looks forward to it". Cross-Strait relations may undergo major changes in 2016. Yet city to city exchanges continue without interruption. That is significant. But when Beijing authorities are shaking Ko Wen-je's hand, they will be asking where Tsai Ing-wen stands. Tsai Ing-wen's feet remain mired in the quicksand of Taiwan independence. Never mind her invocation of the "constitutional framework of the Republic of China" as the basis for cross-Strait relations. Given the Twin Cities Forum dispute, will Tsai Ing-wen be able to "run the red light"?

Full Text Below:

The Taipei-Shanghai "Twin Cities Forum" will convene in Shanghai on the 17th. Ko Wen-je will personally head a delegation and attend. Zhang Zhijun, Director of the Mainland Taiwan Affairs Office, said he "looks forward to it". Cross-Strait relations may undergo major changes in 2016. Yet city to city exchanges continue without interruption. That is significant. But when Beijing authorities are shaking Ko Wen-je's hand, they will be asking where Tsai Ing-wen stands. Tsai Ing-wen's feet remain mired in the quicksand of Taiwan independence. Never mind her invocation of the "constitutional framework of the Republic of China" as the basis for cross-Strait relations. Given the Twin Cities Forum dispute, will Tsai Ing-wen be able to "run the red light"?

From Beijing's perspective, the Twin Cities Forum is a form of bridge building. The deep green Ko Wen-je may be useful in dealing with Tsai Ing-wen and cross-Strait relations after 2016. Will the cross-Strait collision result in more breathing space, or less?

In March, the Beijing authorities held a series of press conferences. Ko Wen-je declared, verbatim, that  "one China is not a problem", and that "the two sides of the Strait are one family". The Beijing authorities expressed "appreciation". As a result, the Twin Cities Forum were not cancelled. But lo and behold, Ko Wen-je later claimed that the Mainland media "quoted him out of context". The Mainland authorities sometimes find Taiwan's political rhetoric slippery. This is especially true of Old School green camp reunification vs. independence rhetoric. Even statements made asked openly in the media, may involve countless loopholes. Therefore even though it is already August, and preparations for the Twin Cities Forum are nearly complete, the Deputy Mayor of Shanghai must now confirm Ko Wen-je's stance with the help of the Mainland media.

Beijing now wants confirmation on the 1992 Consensus. Before Ko Wen-je took office, he said "I have no idea what the 1992 Consensus is about". He even wondered why a "consensus without a consensus" from 20 years ago is the basis for current exchanges. Ko later corrected himself, and said he "understands and respects" the 1992 Consensus. He said he understood that cross-Strait exchanges are not international exchanges. Ko Wen-je's change in tune eliminated the political obstacles standing in the way of the Twin Cities Forum and his visit to the Mainland as mayor.

Regarding the Taiwan Affairs Office's expression of "appreciation", Ko Wen-je dismissed it as "diplomatic language". But Ko spoke to the Mainland media twice. Both times he indulged in political sophistry. In response to Beijing's "one China" stance, the United States said it "acknowledged it" and raised no objections. But it avoided saying that it "recognized it". Japan  expressed "understanding and respect". Ko Wen-je said his "One China is not a problem" remark referred to the blue vs. green "consensus without consensus". He said the blue camp affirmed it, and the green camp was happy to go along. He said the green camp's position was "one China, one Taiwan". The two have nothing to do with each other. Therefore "one China" is not a problem.

As for the 1992 Consensus, Ko Wen-je said he did not expressly acknowledge it. He merely said he "understood and respected" the Mainland's position. He then re-emphasized his own "New Perspectives for 2015". But the term "1992 Consensus" was coined by Su Chi. The KMT followed suit. The CCP accepted it, and the 1992 Consensus become the political basis for cross-Strait exchanges. But here is the embarrassing part. The 1992 Consensus that Ko Wen-je expressed "understanding and respect" for, was the Mainland's version of the 1992 Consensus. So did Ko gain or lose? Ko Wen-je spoke of the 1992 Consensus. The CCP stressed "one China", while the KMT stressed "different interpretations". Tsai Ing-wen has hollowed out the "Republic of China" through backdoor listing. By the same token, Ko Wen-je's sophistry has hollowed out the 1992 Consensus. The Taiwan Affairs Office must now spell out the essence of the 1992 Consensus for Ko Wen-je, namely that "both sides of the Strait are part of one China". It must then give Ko the green light, and proceed to hold the Twin Cities Forum. Is this a case of seeing the light only at the end of one's rope?

The green camp has swiftly gained ground from the blue camp. Beijing desperately needs to get a handle on the situation before 2016. The highly popular Ko Wen-je may be able to transcend blue vs. green, Ko might provide just such a handle. Based on the experience of green camp county chiefs and city mayors, the Mainland has adopted a relatively pragmatic and flexible attitude for cross-strait exchanges at the local level. By contrast, Ko Wen-je has twice been asked to clarify his position on the 1992 Consensus. This means Beijing is holding firm on the bottom line. The Mainland has repeatedly sought to determine Ko Wen-je's actual stance. Clearly mutual trust is the key to cross-Strait exchanges.

Before the 1992 Consensus controvery arose, Ko Wen-je hemmed and hawed, enabling cross-Strait city to city exchanges to continue. The DPP refused to recognize the 1992 Consensus. When Tsai Ing-wen visited the United States, she avoided mention of the 1992 Consensus. She grudgingly pledged to "continue to seek common ground". But the Taiwan Affairs Office demanded answers. "What are cross-Strait relations? What is the basis for cross-Strait relations? How can peaceful and stable cross-Strait relations be maintained?" In fact these are questions the public on Taiwan should be asking.

Zhang Zhijun wants Ko Wen-je to take a stand on the 1992 Consensus. He is pleased that the Twin Cities Forum will proceed without a hitch. Meanwhile however, "all responsible parties must offer a clear response" on the core meaning of the 1992 consensus. Beijing has given Ko Wen-je a green light. But it has also laid a minefield for Tsai Ing-wen.

Ko Wen-je has squeaked by. Can Tsai Ing-wen?

聯合／柯文哲閃躲過關，蔡英文猶隔萬重山

2015-08-11 01:24:00 聯合報 聯合報社論 

 

台北、上海《雙城論壇》確定十七日在上海登場，柯文哲將親自率團出席，中共國台辦主任張志軍表示「樂見其成」。在兩岸關係面臨二○一六年重大變數之際，這項城巿交流機制不致中斷，頗具意義。但當北京握著柯文哲的手，眼睛卻盯著蔡英文的腳；因為蔡英文雙足深陷台獨泥沼，雙手卻高揮「中華民國憲政體制」旗幟推動兩岸關係。從《雙城論壇》的折衝，蔡英文能得出「紅燈易闖」的結論嗎？

在北京的立場，以《雙城論壇》搭橋，應對「墨綠」的柯文哲，有助於下一步應對蔡英文，對二○一六年後的兩岸互動具指引意義。雙方在碰撞中，將推擠出新空間，抑或更壓縮？

北京三月透過陸媒聯訪，由柯文哲照稿宣示「『一個中國』不是問題」和「兩岸一家親」的答案，北京大加「讚賞」，使雙城論壇得以繼續溝通辦理；不料，柯文哲事後卻指陸媒「斷章取義」。中共的文件詮釋學，面對台灣政治生態下的語藝策略，尤其是傳統綠營的統獨修辭，亦見有時而窮，難以掌握，即連透過媒體指定提問，也不免掛一漏萬。於是，八月初，儘管雙城論壇已近籌備完成，中共仍透過上海副巿長回訪探詢，並藉陸媒聯訪補充，確認柯文哲的可能意向。

這回，北京要求確認的就是「九二共識」。柯文哲上任前曾表示不知「九二共識」實質內容為何，更質疑為什麼要拿二十幾年前一個「沒有共識的共識」作為今天討論的基礎；如今，他則改口表示「瞭解和尊重」九二共識，並澄清兩岸交流不是國際交流。柯文哲態度的調整，為雙城論壇的舉辦和他以市長身分登陸，排除了政治障礙。

對於國台辦的「讚賞」，柯文哲說那是「外交辭令」；不過，兩度接受陸媒聯訪，柯文哲也充分發揮政治修辭策略。北京的「一個中國」立場，美國表示「認知」，而且不提異議，但是迴避「承認」；而日本則是「理解和尊重」。至於柯文哲所謂「『一個中國』不是問題」，原是藍綠之間「沒有共識的共識」，藍營固稱當然，綠營卻也樂於稱道，因為以「一中一台」的立場，兩相切割，「一中」沒有問題。

對於「九二共識」，柯文哲並未明言承認，只說「瞭解和尊重」大陸的立場，並再度強調其「一五新觀點」。難堪的是，「九二共識」一辭為蘇起首創，國民黨沿用，而為中共接受並成為兩岸交流的政治基礎，但柯文哲所「瞭解和尊重」的，卻是大陸提出的「九二共識」；如此，是進是退？柯文哲或未計及，談「九二共識」，中共只凸出「一中」，而國民黨更強調「各表」；如果說蔡英文掏空「中華民國」卻借殼使用，柯文哲其實也是架空「九二共識」，魚目混珠。獲得這樣的「瞭解和尊重」，國台辦甚至必須替柯文哲作出「『九二共識』的核心意涵是兩岸同屬一個中國」的補充解釋，然後為他開啟綠燈，放行雙城論壇。這又難道是窮則變？

面對台灣藍綠版圖的急遽消長，北京亟欲在二○一六年的新形勢前，在台灣內部找到可以著力的新支點；而高人氣、可能跳脫藍綠包袱的柯文哲，正是一個支點。根據綠營縣巿長登陸經驗，大陸方面對於兩岸城市或地方層級的交往，有著相對務實和彈性的態度；相形之下，柯文哲兩度被要求透過陸媒公開表態，凸顯的是「九二共識」仍為北京不容逾越的底線。而大陸方面反覆求索柯文哲的真意，更凸顯互信才是兩岸交往真正的關鍵。

在「九二共識」前，柯文哲拐彎抹角，畢竟讓兩岸城巿交流繼續維持。民進黨否認「九二共識」，蔡英文訪美時避提「九二共識」，僅勉強表示，「就繼續求同存異吧」；但旋遭國台辦逼問：「兩岸之間是什麼關係，兩岸關係發展的基礎是什麼，怎樣維護兩岸關係和平穩定發展」。這話，其實也是台灣社會苦苦追問的事。

現在，張志軍一方面表示注意到柯文哲對九二共識的表態，而欣慰《雙城論壇》將順利舉辦，另一方面就九二共識的核心意涵，「要求所有負責任的政黨都需作出明確回答」。北京為柯文哲開啟了綠燈，也為蔡英文劃設了雷區。

柯文哲閃躲過關，但蔡英文能師其故技嗎？

 

Time for Tsai Ing-wen to Prove She Can Govern

Time for Tsai Ing-wen to Prove She Can Govern
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 10, 2015

Executive Summary: A while back DPP ChairpersonTsai Ing-wen met with Time magazine reporters over dinner for a series of interviews. As Tsai helped a reporter to some food, she inadvertently blurted out: "Remember that Taiwan's next president once waited on you." Clearly she is confident of victory. Now that PFP Chairman James Soong has announced his candidacy, the blue camp vote will be split. Tsai Ing-wen's 2016 presidential election prospects seem even more certain.

Full Text Below:

A while back DPP ChairpersonTsai Ing-wen met with Time magazine reporters over dinner for a series of interviews. As Tsai helped a reporter to some food, she inadvertently blurted out: "Remember that Taiwan's next president once waited on you." Clearly she is confident of victory. Now that PFP Chairman James Soong has announced his candidacy, the blue camp vote will be split. Tsai Ing-wen's 2016 presidential election prospects seem even more certain.

Under the circumstances, Tsai Ing-wen may wish to consider what kind of Taiwan she will have to govern upon her election. On cross-strait relations, Chen Shui-bian suffered many setbacks. Ma Ying-jeou mishandled ruling vs. opposition party clashes and national governance. He failed to prioritize, and lost support from both left and right. Tsai Ing-wen will be no exception. How will she deal with such problems?

Tsai Ing-wen faces problems even worse than those faced by Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou. Cross-Strait and international relations are in chaos. Taiwan is wracked by serious internal political divisions. The economy is in dire straits. Since the 1980s, Taiwan has endured political unrest even while it enjoyed economic prosperity. Peoples' lives were generally stable. In recent years however, a worsening economy has led to serious grievances among the young. An even more serious political and economic double whammy awaits. Addressing this plight is not difficult. But it must be done before May of next year.

Taiwan must deal with two kinds of divisions. The Mainland and Taiwan are divided. People on Taiwan are also divided. Both divisions affect each other. The situation is complex and hard to control. Tsai Ing-wen has assured the United States that she will maintain the status quo, ensuring cross-Strait peace. But she has yet to gain the trust of either the Mainland or the blue camp. Even young children know that Old School Taiwan independence zealots have an undisguised agenda. First ensure Tsai Ing-wen's election victory. Leave the details for later. New School Taiwan independence activists make no effort to hide their hatred for "[Mainland] China". In other words, upon election, Tsai Ing-wen must fulfill her campaign promises. She will then meet with powerful resistance. That being the case, she must demonstrate her determination today. She must begin promoting dialogue between Taipei and Beijing, and the blue camp and green camp. Doing so could even lead to a greater triumph for the DPP, and a more stable foundation for future governance.

Social divisions also require attention. If diversification allows mutual respect and dialogue between people holding different views, that is of course good. But recent events have shown that social divisions between opposite ends of the political spectrum make dialogue more difficult and tolerance impossible. As a result, some scholars believe that the ROC is now a nation divided by democratic civil war.

Take the curriculum revision controversy for example. Extremists go online and denounce each other as "Chinese pigs" or "Japanese lackeys". Society is sharply divided. This cannot possibly be good for Taiwan. As the election heats up, the conflict will only become more intense. Social divisions will increase after the election, making reintegration more difficult. So why not call a halt to partisan political battles now?

Economic problems can be classified as internal and external. Internally, industrial competitiveness declined this year. Export momentum weakened. The problem is serious. The real estate market has turned down. The stock market has tumbled. The recent capital gains tax controversy shows that internal boom plus external boom has become internal boom plus external bust. This will deteriorate further, leading to internal bust plus external bust. The public is uneasy about next year. Tsai Ing-wen's chief financial aide Lin Chuan has already announced her intention to repeal the capital gains tax. This of course contradicts Tsai Ing-wen's loudly trumpeted "social justice", and is expected to provoke fierce debate.

Another uncertainty involves energy, primarily electricity power generation. The Number Four Nuclear Power Plant has been mothballed. The decommissioning of old power plants has reduced power reserve margins to 5 to 10%. The slightest mistake could lead to brownouts. The decommissioning of the Number One and Number Two Nuclear Power Plants will reduce the power supply even more. Tsai Ing-wen has stressed the need to increase renewable energy. But this is simply not doable in the short-term. If Tsai Ing-wen is elected, she is certain to encounter power shortages. The subsequent economic decline will discourage manufacturers from investing. This is a major problem that cannot be ignored. Short-term economic decline and medium-term power shortages loom. Tsai Ing-wen should immediately call for dialogue, leading to a consensus across the blue-green divide. She should demonstrate sincerity and ability. She should not imitate James Soong by indulging in empty talk.

Externally, the most pressing issue is economic and trade marginalization. There are three ways to avoid this. One. Sign the MTA. Implement the MTA and previously signed STA as soon as possible. Two. Sign FTAs (free trade agreements) with other countries. Three. Join regional economic organizations such as the TPP and RCEP. The RCEP is Mainland dominated. The chance of Taiwan joining is remote. The TPP is US-led. But it may be too late to do much good. Also pork and beef imports issues remain insoluble. This is a major stumbling block for Taipei-Washington economic and trade relations. FTAs with other countries are unlikely given the international reality. Therefore signing the MTA is our best hope for alleviating the crisis of marginalization.

Everyone wants to "maintain the status quo". In fact our main concern should be to ensure our sovereignty and maintain our economic exchanges. Former Chairperson of the Mainland Affairs Council Tsai Ing-wen once pledged that upon taking office she would honor economic agreements signed by the previous administration. That being the case, why not seek agreement now? Prevent Taiwan from spinning her wheels. Do that, and Tsai Ing-wen's election election is assured.

社論－蔡英文該開始展現治國能力了

稍早民進黨主席蔡英文與美國《時代》雜誌記者共餐並接受訪問，在為記者夾菜時曾不經意說：「台灣下一任總統曾經為妳服務」，清楚展現了她對邁向勝選的信心。隨著親民黨主席宋楚瑜宣布參選，藍營選票再受瓜分，蔡英文2016年總統大選勝算似乎更加確定了。

從這個局面來看，蔡英文現在或許應該認真想想：假如自己當選了，面臨的會是一個怎麼樣的台灣？在兩岸關係上，陳水扁曾經遭遇過的挫折；在朝野對抗與國家治理方面，馬英九的左右失據與輕重拿捏錯誤，她都不可能倖免，那麼，要如何有智慧的應對？

相較陳水扁與馬英九，蔡英文面對的是更糟的壞局，兩岸與國際大局混沌、內部政治嚴重分裂、經濟危機四伏。80年代以來，台灣大體維持政治不安、經濟繁榮的局面，民眾大致還能維持安定的生活。近年經濟稍壞，已造成青年一代嚴重的怨氣，展望未來，很可能陷入更嚴峻的政治經濟雙重夾擊。不過，解除困境並不難，只是來不及等明年5月後才開始。

台灣面臨的是雙重分裂：兩岸分裂、內部分裂問題，兩者相激相盪，情勢複雜且難以掌控。蔡英文已向美國保證會維持現狀、確保海峽和平，但顯然並未得到大陸及藍營的信賴。五尺之童皆知，老派台獨心存陽謀，先讓蔡當選再說，新興台獨則明目張膽反中，換言之，蔡英文選後履行承諾將阻力重重。既然如此，蔡英文現在就應該展現決斷力，開始推動兩岸及藍綠間的對話，或許還能讓民進黨獲得更大的勝利，未來執政的基礎更穩定。

社會對立問題也需要重視，多元化後如果不同立場者間可以互相尊重與對話，當然是好事，但最近一些社會爭議事件卻顯示：政治光譜兩端間，不但越來越難以對話，甚至無法彼此包容，影響所及，有學者認為台灣已經變成現在進行式的民主內戰分裂國家。

從課綱爭議事件來看，網路上兩派極端主義者以「支那豬」、「倭國奴」互評，嚴重撕裂社會，豈是台灣之福？隨著選情日趨激烈，社會裂痕持續擴大，與其選後面對難以整合的國家，政黨持續惡鬥，何不現在就開始避免撕裂？

經濟問題可分為內外兩部分來討論。對內方面，今年以來出現的產業競爭力下滑、出口動能降低問題已相當嚴重，房地產同時開始進入反轉下滑階段，近來券商一再反映的股市重挫與證所稅問題，顯示景氣不但已由內溫外溫轉為內溫外冷，更將進一步惡化為內外皆冷，讓人對明年經濟情勢惴惴不安。蔡英文主要財經幕僚林全已表達要廢除證所稅之意，但如此一來，有違蔡英文標榜的「社會公平正義」，預料社會將是一番激烈爭論。

經濟另一個不確定是能源問題，主要是電力供應，核四封存、老舊電廠陸續退役後，供電備載容量下降，這幾個月的備載容量多在5到10%左右，稍微不慎就要限電。核一、核二又將除役，電力供應更吃緊。蔡英文強調要增加再生能源，但不是短期就能增加，幾乎可預見蔡英文如果當選，任內必然會碰到供電不足危機，並導致廠商投資意願衰落問題，這將會是無法迴避的大問題。面對短期景氣下挫與中期電力供應問題，蔡英文可以立即邀集各方對話，以形成社會共識，展現真實跨越藍綠的誠意與能力，而非如宋楚瑜般空談。

對外方面，最迫切是如何避免經貿邊緣化，其出路有三：一個是完成兩岸貨貿協議，讓貨貿與先前已簽訂的服貿協議盡快上路；再來是與其他國家簽訂FTA（自由貿易協定），第三是加入區域經貿組織（TPP及RCEP）。通盤來看，RCEP是中國主導，加入的機會很小；TPP由美國主導，但可能緩不濟急，而且牛、豬進口問題無解，這是台美經貿關係的大石頭。至於跟其他國家簽FTA，在國際現實環境下，希望不大。因此，最可能在短期完成、紓緩邊緣化危機者，就是貨貿了。

各界對於「維持現狀」的共識，其實主要就是：主權要穩固、

經濟交流要繼續，曾任陸委會主委的蔡英文曾經表示，上任後可以接受兩岸簽訂經濟協議，那麼，現在就可以開始找出交集，不必讓台灣再空轉下去，她的當選就真如探囊取物了。

 

Economic Headwinds Ahead: Ma Government Must Respond

Economic Headwinds Ahead: Ma Government Must Respond
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 7, 2015

Executive Summary: The Comptroller General's Office announced last week that the Republic of China's economic growth rate fell to 0.64% in the second quarter, far lower than the former estimate of 3.05%. This sharp decline in economic growth signals an abrupt reduction of estimated growth from 3% to 2%. It means an economic headwind is blowing.

Full Text Below:

The Comptroller General's Office announced last week that the Republic of China's economic growth rate fell to 0.64% in the second quarter, far lower than the former estimate of 3.05%. This sharp decline in economic growth signals an abrupt reduction of estimated growth from 3% to 2%. It means an economic headwind is blowing.

During the first half of the year, heads of government ministries charged with fiscal and economic affairs repeatedly predicted economic development taking a turn for the better in the second half, and make up for an underperforming first half. But August is already here, and economic indicators still show no sign of improvement. It is increasinly hard to be optimistic. The chill economic winds are mainly due to the twin impact of an export recession and weak domestic demand. The Ministry of Finance announced import and export statistics today. Estimates are that July exports will perpetuate the six month long recession. They will reach the lowest point for exports since the "Six Straight Lows" of 2012.

Taiwan's export decline is due mainly to the weak global economic recovery, the crowding effect of Mainland China's red supply chain, lower crude oil prices, and weakening domestic petrochemical product exports, all of which are interconnected. Economists worry that Taiwan's export declines cannot be remedied by short-term policies. The problem will only become more serious. Downturns in Taiwan's exports have become more frequent in recent years. In the past, export slumps occurred every four or five years. Now they are occuring every three years.

Take domestic demand. Excess savings will rise to 15.52%, a 28 year high. Ultra high savings rates means that the private sector cannot find anywhere to invest their capital. No matter where they park their money, it remains idle. Because private investment and government investment were insufficient, excess savings increased nearly a trillion dollars over the past year. This money cannot be turned into engines of economic growth.

The second half was supposed to be high season for exports. But Taiwan's exports encountered economic headwinds. Domestic demand also cooled. FSC Chairman Tsao Chung-ming said he was "surprised as hell". The Executive Yuan convened an emergency meeting of ministries. They proposed measures to save the economy, generated few sparks. The Executive Yuan proposed "Measures to Strengthen the Economy". They included three measures: industrial upgrading, export expansion, and investment promotion. Premier Mao Chi-kuo set the tone. The "Measures to Strengthen the Economy" would be a "midterm review and reinforcement of existing programs". But these are apparently old hat, and offer nothing new.

The public expects much from the business sector. Of course it expects more than mere "review and reinforcement". It expects a spark of hope, along with genuine initiative. In recent years, government plans to rescue the economy were often confined to shouting slogans about industrial upgrading and export expansion. These were invariably ineffective. People experienced no sense of economic revitalization. One reason, as Premier Mao noted, was that industrial restructuring is a long-term project. It will not yield immediate results. But a bigger problem is that the Ma government and the Mao cabinet are apparently already "in transition". They have apparently begun sitting out the last days of their administration. They have thrown in the towel, lost all ambition, and are merely biding their time.

Admittedly, the Ma government's appointment of officials charged with fiscal and economic affairs was bungled. It was a main contributor to economic stagnation. We are not talking about government guidance for industry, or the allocation of national resources for certain industries. We are saying that the current fiscal and economic brain trust is simply not up to the job. It does not understand Taiwan's economic advantages and disadvantages. How can it be expected to make far-sighted decisions about Taiwan's economic future? During the boom years, the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Council for Economic Planning And Development played the role of locomotive. Today however, the Ministry of Economic Affairs is clueless. The CEPD has been restructured and upgraded. It is now known as the National Development Council or NDC. Its most visible function appears to be economic forecasting.  Without a locomotive at the head, how can any train generate economic momentum?

As Central Bank President Perng Huai-nan suggested, when the economy is bad, the government should implement an expansionary fiscal policy. The priority should be domestic public works. Next year the government's public works budget will increase from 177.2 billion NT, to over 180 billion NT. To make proper use of this budget, the government must have more accurate planning. The Public Works budget for next year must allow for the construction of sewers, improvement of farmland hydraulic projects, reinforcement of unsafe school buildings and other infrastructure. These include improvements to airport transit, the Suhua Highway, the west coast expressway, the Kaohsiung underground railway, and other major public works projects. We must improve construction quality and remain ahead of schedule, so that the public and businesses will be properly served. State-owned enterprises should also increase domestic investment. Taipower should phase out old, polluting generators. In particular, it should encourage industrial investment in the emerging energy industry. Not only should it promote investment. It should also address the cumulative effects of air pollution.

In order for Taiwan to survive the economic winter, the government must act. It must have both short and long term plans. It must pay attention to domestic opportunities. Publc works projects must help the common man. The government must implement economic policies with tangible results in order to win public support.

經濟大逆風來襲 馬政府不能再坐而談

2015-08-07聯合報

主計總處上周公布我國第二季經濟成長率跌為○．六四％，遠低於原先預估的三．○五％。如此大幅下滑，我國今年經濟成長形勢頓時由「保三」變成「保二」，這已預告了經濟大逆風的來臨。

今年上半年，政府財經部會首長多次預告：下半年台灣經濟發展可望逐漸轉佳，彌補上半年成長火力的不足。但時序已進入八月，各項經濟指標仍然未見好轉的跡象，情勢難以樂觀。這一波景氣寒風，主要受「出口衰退」與「內需不振」的雙重影響。財政部預訂今天公布進出口統計數據，而各界預估七月出口將出現連續第六個月衰退，這將是繼二○一二年台灣出口「連六衰」之後，出口再陷低潮。

台灣出口衰退，主要是受全球景氣復甦力道疲弱、中國大陸紅色供應鏈排擠影響，加上原油價格走跌，國內石化相關產品出口轉弱，在在皆互為關聯。經濟學者普遍憂心，台灣出口非短期政策能救，未來挑戰只會愈來愈大。更值得注意的是，近年台灣出口陷入低潮的循環周期有縮短的趨勢，過去每隔四、五年會有一波出口低潮，但現在周期逐漸降至三年。

在內需方面，我國超額儲蓄率將攀升至十五．五二％，是廿八年來的新高。超高額儲蓄意味，民間資金找不到投資方向，資金放在那裡變成呆錢。由於民間投資與政府投資均不足，今年超額儲蓄將比去年增近兆元，但這些錢都無法化為經濟成長的動力。

下半年原本應逐漸進入出口旺季，但台灣出口卻吹起了逆風，內需景氣也飄來陣陣寒意。對此，金管會主委曾銘宗以「跌破眼鏡」形容，行政院亦緊急召集各部會提出搶救經濟措施，但會中卻未激起什麼火花。行政院提出的「經濟體質強化措施」，分為產業升級、出口拓展與投資促進三個面向，閣揆毛治國定調，這次的經濟體質強化措施，是「現行方案的期中檢討與補強」；但這些看起來大抵都是老調，毫無新意。

民眾與企業界期待的，當然不只是「檢討與補強」，而是要拿出有亮點、帶有動力的積極作為。回顧近年來政府拚經濟的模式，常喊的口號是產業升級與出口拓展，但始終成效不彰，使民眾對拚經濟日漸無感。其中原因，固有如毛揆所言「產業結構的調整是長期扎根的工程」，非一時能見其效；但更大的癥結是，馬政府及毛內閣上下似乎瀰漫著「過渡」心態，只求安然度過執政的最後階段，而失去抓緊時機、追求作為的企圖心，不斷坐視時機流逝。

不可否認，馬政府財經部會用人布局的失當，是造成經濟動能不足的主因之一。我們談的，並不是政府要如何對產業下指導棋，或將國家資源優先分配用於發展某些產業等；而是目前整個內閣的財經大腦，根本不足以對台灣經濟的優劣作出有效分析，遑論對未來的發展作出前瞻的規劃。在經濟起飛年代，經濟部和經建會扮演著火車頭的角色；而如今，經濟部不知所為何事，至於由經建會改制升格的國發會，最明顯可見的功能似乎只在發表景氣預測。失去火車頭的前導，經濟列車怎麼會有足夠動力？

一如央行總裁彭淮南的建議，當經濟不好時，政府應實施擴張型的財政政策，優先將預算用於國內公共建設。明年政府的公共建設預算，從原先的一七七二億元提高至一八○○餘億，如何善用這筆預算，政府必須有更精準的規畫。明年的公共建設預算，除推動興建下水道、改善農田水力建設與危險校舍耐震補強等常態項目，包括機場捷運、蘇花公路與西濱快速道路改善、高雄市鐵路地下化等重大公共建設，政府應加強施工品質並設法提前完工，讓民眾、企業享受公共建設的便利。此外，也應評估推動國營事業增加國內投資，鼓勵台電提前汰換老舊、高汙染的發電機組，尤其應鼓勵產業投入新興能源產業，既促進投資，也改善長年積累的空汙問題。

要讓台灣度過這一波景氣寒冬，政府不能只是坐而談，必須長短期並進，重視內需商機，建設項目則要能貼近庶民需求，必須要「有感救經濟」，才能獲得全民支持。

Does Tsai Ing-wen Really Believe Lai Ching-teh May Ignore the Tainan City Council?

Does Tsai Ing-wen Really Believe Lai Ching-teh May Ignore the Tainan City Council?
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 6, 2015

Executive Summary: For over 200 days, Tainan City Mayor Lai Ching-teh has refused to appear before the Tainan City Council. He now faces impeachment by the Control Yuan for "contempt of the system". Lai Ching-teh has lashed back, and accused the Control Yuan of "selective prosecution". He said the struggle between the Tainan Mayor's Office and the Tainan City Council was a "political matter" rather than a legal matter. He dismissed the Control Yuan's impeachment process as baseless. Lai Ching-teh has no intention of appearing before the Tainan City Council. But the question is, does the DPP really approve of Lai Ching-teh's actions? Is there no one in the green camp who can dissuade him from his current course?

Full Text Below:

For over 200 days, Tainan City Mayor Lai Ching-teh has refused to appear before the Tainan City Council. He now faces impeachment by the Control Yuan for "contempt of the system". Lai Ching-teh has lashed back, and accused the Control Yuan of "selective prosecution". He said the struggle between the Tainan Mayor's Office and the Tainan City Council was a "political matter" rather than a legal matter. He dismissed the Control Yuan's impeachment process as baseless. Lai Ching-teh has no intention of appearing before the Tainan City Council. But the question is, does the DPP really approve of Lai Ching-teh's actions? Is there no one in the green camp who can dissuade him from his current course?

A statement issued by the DPP aided and abetted Lai Ching-teh all the way. It shamelessly twisted the meaning of the law to conform to the DPP's own rhetoric. For example, the DPP statement quoted Grand Justice Interpretation 498, is entitled "Local self-government guaranteed by the Constitution". The interpretation means that agencies of the central government may not intervene in the affairs of city governments and city councils. In fact the interpretation addressed central government respect for local self-government. It was a response to the question, "Are local government officials required to respond to summons issued by the Legislative Yuan?" It made clear that local government civil servants "must decide for themselves" whether to respond to summons by the national legislature. It did not mean that local mayors may ignore summons issued by local city councils. The DPP flagrantly twisted the meaning of the Grand Justices Interpretation. It assumed that the public is ignorant enough that it can be led around by the nose. What's more, Article 48 of the Local Government Act, states that "City mayors of Directly Administered Muncipalities are required to make policy addresses. Level 1 managers are required to present business reports. Council Members have the right to question them. Are all these obligations and rights to be trashed merely because Lai Ching-teh threw a temper tantrum?

Besides, the DPP cited Chang Tung-rung's lobbying and Liu Cheng-hung's use of eminent domain in the Dapu Borough construction projects. They argued that Chang Tung-rung was impeached twice without success. They argued that the Liu Cheng-hung investigation has gone nowhere. They argued that the Control Yuan's impeachment of Lai Ching-teh was politically motivated. This sort of childish evasion reminds one of students caught cheating who then whine, "Why me and not him?" They cannot prove their innocence. If a ball game involves enough players like this, it cannot continue. Cases differ in nature, and therefore the amount of time required for their investigation. Of course there will be differences. Lai Ching-teh's actions have clearly undermined democracy. Can the Control Yuan do nothing?

Lai Ching-teh took these drastic measures in order to force the judicial system to accelerate the prosecution. Lai wants Li Chuan-hsiao convicted as early as possible. He is using political means to manipulate the administration of justice. In his own eyes he is merely using his popularity to ensure justice. But from a local government perspective, he is abusing his power to vent his spleen. Interaction between his office and the city council has become a gladiatorial arena for himself and Li Chuan-hsiao. From a more elevated perspective, democratic checks and balances between the executive branch and the legislature branch are a centuries old tradition. Executives must submit to legislative oversight designed to prevent those in power from doing anything they wish. Lai Ching-teh has refused to appear before the city council for over 200 days. That means he has been operating without oversignt for over 200 days. He may even be making illegal use of municipal government funds. The Tainan City Council may be willing to accept this humiliation. But our concern is that Lai is undermining the spirit and institutions of democracy.

Stonewalling for over 200 days highlights Lai Ching-teh's sheer obstinacy. As a rising star of the Democratic Progressive Party, his high-handed behavior is utterly lacking in the spirit of democracy. Lai may have gotten away with his behavior in Tainan. But if he aspires to higher office, this is sure to become a political stumbling block. Why after more than 200 days, has no one in the DPP been able to persuade him to change his attitude? Suppose next year Tsai Ing-wen becomes president? Suppose Lai Ching-teh still refuses to appear before the Tainan City Council? Will she continue allowing him to do whatever he wants? Suppose personal grievances override the democratic process? Suppose governmental checks and balances are undermined, legislative oversight is paralyzed, municipal oversight is shut down? Suppose other county chiefs and city mayors follow suit? Will Tsai Ing-wen still view this as righteous behavior?

The reason we are questioning Tsai Ing-wen's attitude can be summed up in two words -- the system. A nation must operate in accordance with its political system, not the personal whims of this or that political party. Just because some netizens have deified certain politicians, that does not mean they can single-handedly destroy the system. Otherwise, how will Taiwan remain on track? How can it be governed in accordance with the rule of law? Tsai Ing-wen is an up and coming opposition leader. If she turns a blind eye to Lai Ching-teh's arrogant usurpation of power, or worse, openly abets it, how can people believe that Tsai Ing-wen will remain on the straight and narrow path of democracy?

Lai Ching-teh refuses to appear before the Tainan City Council. In fact, he is already in contempt of the Tainan City Council and all its members. In fact, he has already shone a spotlight on his personal vendetta against Li Chuan-hsiao. He is trampling over democratic institutions in order to settle a personal score. Actually, if Lai Ching-teh wants to teach Li Chuan-hsiao a lesson, he could take an entirely different tack. He could conduct a high-profile city council inquiry. He could explain his concept of governance to the people. He could use a question and answer format to demonstrate his rhetorical prowess, enabling the budget to pass without resistance. When entering the council, he could deliver a speech explaining his position, He could use the opportunity to embarrass Li Chuan-hsiao. He could even use the question and answer session to to launch an attack. In a democracy one must enage one's opponents in order to defeat one's opponents. As long as Lai refuses to appear before the Tainan City Council, not only will he undermine the system, he will also hurt himself.

Is the system more important? Or is the person of the mayor more important? Perhaps the system will never be deified. But the system is something the people can trust and follow. Lai Ching-teh views his impeachment by the Control Yuan with contempt. But what is he striving for, really? Does he want to go from being God Lai to Emperor Lai?

蔡英文果真苟同賴清德拒赴議會

2015-08-06聯合報

台南市長賴清德因拒赴議會備詢兩百多天，遭監察院以「輕蔑體制」為由通過彈劾。賴清德則反詰監察院「選擇性辦案」，並稱府會之爭是「政治問題」而非「法律問題」，監院的彈劾並無根據。賴清德似仍無意面對議會，但令人好奇的是，民進黨果真苟同賴清德的作法嗎？或者綠營上下沒有人勸得動賴清德？

從民進黨發表的聲明看，通篇還在為賴清德護航，甚至厚顏曲解法令以方便自己的說詞。例如，民進黨引述大法官釋字四九八號解釋令，稱「地方自治受到憲法保障」，市府和議會的問題，中央機關不應介入。事實上，此一解釋令談到中央對地方自治的尊重時，是在答覆「地方政府人員有無赴立法院備詢的義務」之疑，認為地方政府公務員「得衡酌其必要性」決定是否赴立法院，而不是說地方政府有權不接受議會質詢。民進黨「竹篙湊菜刀」，居然也能拿大法官解釋令胡說一通，顯然認為老百姓無知可欺。更何況，《地方制度法》四十八條規定：直轄市長有提出施政報告、一級主管有提出業務報告之義務，議員有質詢權；這些義務和權利，難道都可因賴清德一怒全部毀棄？

不僅如此，民進黨更舉張通榮關說和劉政鴻大埔強行開發案為例，指張通榮兩次彈劾未過，劉政鴻案則調查尚無下文，質疑監察院處理賴清德案具有高度政治性。這種推託法，就跟學生犯規被罰卻辯稱「為什麼抓我不抓他」一樣幼稚，無法證明自己無辜；而如果一場球賽有幾名這種球員，比賽根本無法進行。不同案件性質各異，所需調查時間不同，當然會有參差；而賴清德的作為，正對民主體制構成戕害，監察院豈能坐視？

賴清德採取如此激烈的手段，目的是企圖逼司法體系加快審理，以期早日將李全教定罪；這正是企圖利用政治影響司法。從他的立場，這是藉著自己的高人氣尋求正義的一種方式；但從地方政治看，卻是他為了發洩自己的怨恨，把府會互動變成了他和李全教的私人決鬥場。再站高一點看，府會制衡是民主政治數百年的傳統，首長必須接受議會監督，旨在防止掌權者為所欲為。賴清德兩百多天未進議會，表示他有兩百多天未受監督，包括市府預算都可能瀕臨違法動支；就算台南議會甘願接受這種羞辱，但民主精神與體制的破壞才是更值得擔心的事。

兩百多日的堅持，反映了賴清德性格的執拗。作為民進黨的明日之星，如此獨斷獨行、毫無民主精神的作風，就算在台南行得通，但日後若要更上層樓時，必然變成其政治障礙。值得玩味的是，為何兩百多天來民進黨無人能勸他改變態度？試想，如果明年蔡英文執政，賴清德仍拒赴議會，她仍然會任他一意孤行嗎？而如果政治的私人恩怨可以凌駕民主到這種地步，府會的制衡被葬送，民意代表的職權被癱瘓，市政的監督被關機，假設其他縣市首長跟進，蔡英文仍覺得理直氣壯嗎？

我們之所以要質問蔡英文的態度，重點只在「制度」二字。這個國家如果不是依照制度而運作，而是依照個人喜好或不同政黨之興之所至，或因為某些人獲得網民「神」的封號就可以隻手毀壞體制，台灣如何能依法行政、依軌道運轉？作為即將攫取大位的在野黨領袖，蔡英文如果對賴清德的傲慢僭越視若無睹，甚至公開給予支持，民眾如何相信蔡英文會公正、持平地走在民主軌道上？

賴清德拒赴議會，其實藐視的是議會及全體議員，而不是李全教；他是在踐踏民主體制，以凸顯其私刑正義。事實上，如果要給李全教一點顏色，賴清德大可以採取另一種策略：高調進入議會備詢。在議會中，他可以大方向市民說明自己的施政理念，利用詢答施展自己的政治魅力，使預算案、建設案順利過關。進議會時，他可以先發表一篇演說明志，趁機給李全教一些難堪，甚至利用詢答對他發難。民主政治的法則是：必須交手，才能給對手重擊；拒絕出席，卻只會破壞體制，造成自傷。

要問：是制度大，還是市長大？也許制度得不到「神」的封號，但這才是人民可以相信及依循的東西。賴清德並不把監察院的彈劾放在眼裡，但他該想想：把「賴神」變成「賴皇」，是不是他想要的結局？

Does Tsai Ing-wen have Professor Ko's Wisdom?

Does Tsai Ing-wen have Professor Ko's Wisdom?
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 5, 2015

Executive Summary: On August 3rd, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je told the Xinhua News Agency and other Mainland media organizations that the 1992 Consensus is the basis for cross-Strait peace. He said he "understood and respected" this. He characterized exchanges between Taipei and Shanghai as "cross-Strait exchanges". The Mainland's Taiwan Affairs Office immediately affirmed Ko Wen-je's latest statement. We look forward to Mayor Ko Wen-je's attendance at the Twin Cities Forum in Shanghai, and continued exchanges between the two cities.

Full Text Below:

On August 3rd, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je told the Xinhua News Agency and other Mainland media organizations that the 1992 Consensus is the basis for cross-Strait peace. He said he "understood and respected" this. He characterized exchanges between Taipei and Shanghai as "cross-Strait exchanges". The Mainland's Taiwan Affairs Office immediately affirmed Ko Wen-je's latest statement. We look forward to Mayor Ko Wen-je's attendance at the Twin Cities Forum in Shanghai, and continued exchanges between the two cities.

Ko Wen-je refers to himself as a "deep green". But when he became Taipei Mayor, he fully understood the importance of cross-Strait exchanges. Politicians must demonstrate flexibility and wisdom. Cross-Strait relations require humility. The Mainland insists on the 1992 Consensus. Ko Wen-je went from suspicion and denial, to understanding and respect, eventually overcoming his difficulties. The Mainland also demonstrated flexibility and wisdom when conftonted with a deep green mayor. This enabled the Mainland to focus on the 1992 Consensus, while Ko Wen-je focused on his New Perspectives for 2015.

During the Taipei mayoral election, Ko Wen-je said he had no idea what the 1992 Consensus was all about. He ridicule it. He said, "There is no consensus among us called the 1992 Consensus".He said the 1992 Consensus was outdated. He wondered why anyone would continue clinging to it? He said the two sides should renegotiate and seek a new consensus based on current circumstances.

Not only did Ko repudiate the 1992 Consensus, upon his election as Taipei Mayor, he told reporters that the normalization of cross-Strait relations needed no concessions. He considered Chinese affairs to be "foreign affairs". He said China has the same rights and obligations as the United States. Chinese students on Taiwan should enjoy the same rights to health insurance as American students. Ko Wen-je saw Mainland students as foreign students. He implied that cross-Strait relations were foreign relations. He criticized the Mainland's "one country, two systems", saying it should be changed to "two countries, one system". His offhand remarks nearly led to the cancellation of this year's Twin Cities Forum. They nearly ended interaction between Taipei and the Mainland.

Fortunately, Ko Wen-je soon changed his tune.  On March 30, before Mainland reporters, Ko announced his "New Perspectives for 2015" on cross-Strait relations. He expressed a willingness to honor past cross-Strait interactions and past agreements. He said that based on existing political foundations, and "mutual recognition, mutual understanding, mutual respect, and mutual cooperation", he would consider "the two sides of the Strait as one family". He would promote exchanges and increase goodwill, enabling people on both sides of the Strait to seek a better future. Ko Wen-je even added that no one today imagines there are two Chinas, and said that "one China" is not a problem. He did not explicitly mention the 1992 Consensus. But he did say that "one China is not a problem", that "the two sides of the Strait are one family", and he did affirm "existing political foundations". These remarks were well received by the Mainland. The future of Taipei-Mainland relations looked bright. But the foundation requires strengthening. Last week, during a meeting with Deputy Mayor of Shanghai Ong Tie-hui, a Ko staffer mistakenly referred to the host as an "international affairs group", raising Mainland eyebrows.

Ko Wen-je quickly managed the crisis. He told Mainland reporters that Mainland affairs are not international affairs. He said the Taipei City Government Secretariat has established a "Mainland Group" dedicated to mainland affairs. He said "It has also established an International Affairs Group dedicated to foreign affairs." He said, "We understand the difference between the two, and we will deal with it appropriately". The implication was that he did not see the Mainland as a foreign nation, and did not see cross-Strait relations as relations between two different countries. He added that the Mainland advocated the 1992 Consensus as the basis for cross-Strait peace. He said he understood and respected their position.

In interactions with the Mainland, Ko Wen-je has adopted a pragmatic position. He initially said he had no idea what the 1992 Consensus was about. He said the 1992 Consensus was outdated. He said he regarded China as a foreign country. But Ko eventually changed his tune. He said one China is not a problem. He said he respected the existing cross-Strait political foundation. He said he understood and respected the 1992 Consensus as the basis for cross-Strait peace. He said he understood the difference between mainland affairs and foreign affairs. He gradually mended relations with the Mainland, He ensured that the Twin Cities Forum would continue. He ensured that the Mainland and Taipei would "maintain the status quo". On cross-Strait relations Ko Wen-je has demonstrated a pragmatic and flexible attitude. He has maintained good relations with the Mainland. His actions merit recognition. Tsai Ing-wen, who remains mired in cross-Strait issues, could learn a lesson from him.

Tsai says she advocates "maintaining the status quo". She says she advocates upholding the current ROC constitutional framework. She says she advocates the continuation of a stable cross-Strait peace. But precisely what status quo does she hope to maintain? On what basis? She has been deliberately vague. As a result, she has not gained the public trust. CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping delivered two speeches on the Mainland this year. In them he made clear that "The 1992 Consensus is the basis for cross-strait political trust, dialogue, and consultations. It has played an irreplaceable role in the improvement of cross-Strait relations. We have long upheld the 1992 Consensus as the foundation and precondition for exchanges with the Taiwan authorities and political parties". If Tsai Ing-wen seeks to maintain the status quo, she has no way around the 1992 Consensus. So what will she do? Ko Wen-je has adopted a pragmatic and flexible approach. This has enabled him and the other side to each stand pat. In fact, Ko has provided Tsai Ing-wen with a beacon. Now the only question is whether Tsai Ing-wen has Ko Wen-je's wisdom.

柯P的智慧 蔡英文跟得上嗎？

2015-8-5 中國時報

台北市長柯文哲3日接受新華社等大陸媒體採訪時，對九二共識是兩岸關係和平發展的基礎，表示「瞭解和尊重」，並把台北與上海的交流定義為「兩岸交流」。柯文哲的最新表態，立即獲得大陸國台辦正面的回應，我們可以樂觀期待，柯文哲將以市長身分前往上海出席雙城論壇，延續兩市的交流關係。

柯文哲自稱「墨綠」，但就任台北市長後，充分理解兩岸交流的重要，展現了政治人物應有的彈性與智慧，兩岸關係這門功課也願意謙虛學習，面對大陸堅持的九二共識，柯文哲從質疑否定，再到瞭解和尊重，終於一步步克服了困難。大陸面對台灣「墨綠」市長，也展現了彈性與智慧，營造出與柯文哲在九二共識與一五新觀點間各說各話的空間。

競選台北市長期間，柯文哲曾表示，他不知道「九二共識」的實質內容，甚至嘲諷「我們之間沒有共識，叫作『九二共識』」。他質疑九二共識已經不合時宜，如今仍然死守，到底意義多大？兩岸應該重新談判，在現行狀況下尋求新的共識。

他不僅否定九二共識，當選台北市長後接受媒體訪問時又說，兩岸關係正常化不需讓利，他對中國事務的處理原則是「把中國當做外國」，美國有的權利義務，中國也應有。所以中生納保議題，凡是美國學生在台灣享有的平等權益，「中國也要有」。柯文哲把陸生視同外籍生，把兩岸關係暗喻為兩國關係，接著又加碼批評大陸主張的「一國兩制」，認為應改為「兩國一制」。即興式發言已讓今年的雙城論壇瀕臨觸礁，台北市與大陸的交流互動難以維持。

所幸柯文哲很快做出調整，他於3月30日透過接受陸媒專訪方式，提出兩岸關係「一五新觀點」，表示願尊重兩岸過去已經簽署的協議和互動歷史，並在既有的政治基礎上，以「互相認識、互相瞭解、互相尊重、互相合作」的原則，秉持「兩岸一家親」的精神，促進交流、增加善意，讓兩岸人民去追求更美好的共同未來。柯文哲還說，當今世界上並沒有人認為有兩個中國，「一個中國」不是問題。雖然九二共識沒說出口，但「一個中國不是問題」、「兩岸一家親」及「既有的政治基礎上」的說法，獲得大陸的肯定，台北市與大陸的互動維持現狀露出曙光，但基石還不夠堅固。因而上周在會見上海副市長翁鐵慧時，幕僚無心疏忽將接待單位誤植為「國際事務組」，卻引起大陸的疑慮。

柯文哲迅速控管危機，再次透過陸媒專訪澄清，大陸事務不是國際事務。他說，北市府祕書處下設立了「大陸小組」專門辦理大陸事務，「另外設有國際事務小組處理外國事務」。他說，「我們了解兩者的不同，在這方面會處理得很好」。言下之意，他不把大陸當外國，兩岸不是國與國的關係。他並表示，大陸方面提出「九二共識」是兩岸關係和平發展的基礎，他對這一立場表示瞭解和尊重。

柯文哲在與大陸互動中，逐步務實調整了自己的兩岸觀，從不知九二共識、九二共識不合時宜、把中國當外國，到一個中國不是問題、尊重既有政治基礎、兩岸一家親，再到瞭解和尊重「九二共識」作為兩岸關係和平發展的基礎、了解大陸事務和外國事務的不同，逐步盤活和大陸的關係，使雙城論壇確定得以持續辦，台北市和大陸的互動交流得以「維持現狀」。柯文哲在兩岸觀點及與大陸維持良性互動上展現的務實靈活，平實而論是值得肯定，也值得在兩岸議題上仍陷於泥淖的蔡英文學習。

蔡英文主張「維持現狀」，在中華民國現行憲政體制下，持續推動兩岸關係的和平穩定發展，但她要維持的是那種現狀？以及靠什麼來維持？一直語焉不詳，以致無法取信於人。中共總書記習近平在今年大陸兩會上講的很清楚，「九二共識對兩岸建立政治互信、開展對話協商、改善和發展兩岸關係，發揮了不可替代的重要作用。我們始終把堅持九二共識作為同台灣當局和各政黨開展交往的基礎和條件。」可見蔡英文想維持現狀，九二共識是遶不開的，那怎麼辦？柯文哲的務實靈活作法，和對岸保持各自表述的論述空間，其實已給蔡英文指路明燈，就看蔡的智慧能不能跟上柯了。

TPP Final Stretch: Is Taiwan Ready?

TPP Final Stretch: Is Taiwan Ready?
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 4, 2015

Executive Summary: Negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) were scheduled for completion last week. But negotiations on this massive trade liberalization agreement broke down at 98% completion. The final 2% is usually the most difficult part of trade negotiations. So the result was not surprising. This means the TPP is no longer empty talk, and is about to become a concrete reality. For Taiwan, which is interested in joining, the process has entered its final countdown.

Full Text Below:

Negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) were scheduled for completion last week. But negotiations on this massive trade liberalization agreement broke down at 98% completion. The final 2% is usually the most difficult part of trade negotiations. So the result was not surprising. This means the TPP is no longer empty talk, and is about to become a concrete reality. For Taiwan, which is interested in joining, the process has entered its final countdown.

The TPP is the single-handed creation of the United States. At the moment, 12 major Asia-Pacific countries have joined. They include Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Singapore, and Malaysia. Since consultations began in 2010, the United States has trumpeted the TPP as the landmark FTA of the 21st century. Therefore in addition to traditional liberalization of tariffs, service industries, and foreign investments, negotiations will also include
e-commerce, regulatory transparency, fair competition in state-owned enterprises, environmental protection, labor rights, anti-corruption provisions, and other new economic and trade issues. They will even include SME cooperation, capacity building, and the development of  partnership type trade and development agreements.

The United States authored TPP has four characteristics. They are: A high degree of liberalization, a wide range of issues, regulatory reform, and timeliness. The above mentioned passages are consistent with these four characteristics. In any event, the TPP is essentially an FTA. The participating countries all want ways to eliminate tariffs, and to open markets to the service industries and foreign investment. Labor and environmental protection provisions prevent governments from lowering environmental and labor standards with sweatshops to increase competitiveness. Transparency regulations ensure that the views of foreign businesses will be clearly reflected in foreign policy. Anti-corruption provisions prevent the use of funds for bribery instead of economic competition.

The TPP's complicated nature makes negotiations difficult. First, TPP members are diverse. They include industrial giant Japan, but also Malaysia, Vietnam and other rising stars. They also include other large agricultural interests in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, and Peru. Their interests differ. So do their pressures. Japan is strong industrially, yet several agricultural products, such as rice, beef, and pork, are considered sacrosanct and inviolable. Complex interests in all countries make balancing interests extremely difficult.

Second, the 21st century indices of the TPP for health care pricing transparency, anti-corruption, competitive neutrality of state-owned enterprises, labor protection, environmental protection, all impact domestic policy, creating internal conflicts of interest. Using economic and trade agreements to resolve domestic conflicts is no simple matter.

Third, the participating countries are numerous. This sharply increases the difficulty of negotiations. On top of which the United States fired the first shot, to underscore its leadership and pivot to Asia. This makes compromise on liberalization even more difficult. Being pressured to sign for the sake of signing is another source of resistance.

Under these circumstances, the fact that the TPP is 98% complete after five years is astonishing. Meeting the timetable over the past several months involved behind the scenes considerations. Most importantly, US president Obama's term of office ends next year.  Only six months remain before election considerations begin to influence TPP congressional review. Even more urgent is Canada's October elections. The pressure exerted by that is greater still. Each nation wants the agreement reached swiftly. If the United States loses its sense of urgency, overall momentum will be lost. The current talks have failed. The nations will begin bilateral talks with rivals and nations that present the most serious problems. Twists and turns in the coming weeks cannot be ruled out.

Each of the nations joining the TPP will pay a price. Membership will help industries lower export barriers. Nations will use the TPP to accelerate domestic reform. For example, they will be used to convince sweatshop bosses that the old way will no longer work. Governments will use the United States to overcome resistance within their own countries. Based on past experience, external pressure for reform is quicker and more thorough than attempts to achieve domestic consensus.

For Taiwan, joining the TPP is not about this. Taiwan corruption mitigation, environmental protection, and labor standards meet international standards. But transparency and regulation still fall short compared to the United States and Australia. It still has many state-owned enterprises. One of Taiwan's largest scale reforms took place over 10 years ago, when it joined the World Trade Organization (WTO). This opened up the mobile phone market and abolished the Tobacco and Wine Monopoly.  These international obligations accelerated internal reforms. Without them Vietnam and Malaysia would have leapfrogged ahead, and Taiwan would have been too late. Moreover, the TPP does not apply to the Chinese mainland. It does not involve complex and sensitive cross-Strait issues. Therefore we pray the TPP passes quickly, re-opens the door, and invites Taiwan in. The only question that remains is: Is Taiwan Ready?

TPP僅剩最後一哩，台灣準備好了嗎？

2015-08-04聯合報

原訂上週完成談判的「跨太平洋夥伴協定」（ＴＰＰ）這個巨型貿易自由化協定，在宣布完成度九八％後破局。經貿談判最後的二％通常都是最困難的問題，這個結果並不令人意外。然而，這也意味ＴＰＰ不再是空談的概念，即將具體成形。對於有意加入下一輪選秀的台灣而言，時間表已經進入了倒數階段。

目前，已有日、澳、紐、加、星、馬、越等十二個亞太主要國家加入的ＴＰＰ，是美國一手主導的產物。自二○一○年開始協商時，美國就講得很明白：ＴＰＰ將是廿一世紀自貿協定的指標。也因此，在談判議題上，除了傳統的關稅、服務業及投資等自由化外，ＴＰＰ更包括了電子商務、法規透明、國營事業公平競爭、環境保護、勞工權益及防貪條款等新興經貿議題，乃至於中小企業合作、能力建構及貿易與發展等屬於「夥伴」性質的專章。

美國歸納ＴＰＰ共有四個特徵，分別是：「高標準自由化」、「議題涵蓋廣泛」、「監管法規革新」及「與時俱進」。從前述的章節來看，確實符合這四項特徵。無論如何，ＴＰＰ骨子裡還是一個自貿協定，參與的國家都一樣要想辦法消除關稅、開放服務業及投資。勞工及環境保護的主要目的，則是擔心有國家利用降低環保及勞工標準（即「血汗工廠」），作為增加競爭力的手段；要求法規透明，是希望外資外商的意見能在政策制定過程中清楚表達。至於防貪條款，更是防制各國運用金錢賄賂而非憑實力競爭的機制。

也正因為這樣複雜的性質，使得ＴＰＰ談判大不易。首先，ＴＰＰ的成員成分多元，有工業老大哥日本，也有馬來西亞、越南等後起之秀，更有美、加、澳、紐及智利、秘魯等農業大國，利益不同，壓力也不同。日本工業極強，卻把好幾個農產品（如稻米、牛豬肉等）視為不可侵犯的神聖領域。各國利益錯綜複雜，算盤要如何打才能獲致利益平衡點，確實不易。

第二，ＴＰＰ的廿一世紀指標定位，使得像健保定價透明化、防貪、國營事業競爭中立、環保勞工保護等，都深入到各國的境內政策，內部利益衝突更大。利用經貿協定來解決這些內部問題，確實不容易。

第三，由於參與國家數目多，各種談判情境的排列組合也驟然增加，加上美國要打響這第一炮，以顯現其重返亞洲的領導地位，因此對自由化程度不輕易妥協，不為簽而簽，也是困難重重的原因。

在這個背景下，ＴＰＰ能在五年時間就走完九八％的進度，已經跌破了一堆眼鏡。這幾個月完成的時間表，有一些幕後考量；其中最重要的是，美國歐巴馬總統明年任期就結束，約僅剩半年時間可以在比較沒有選舉干擾下，嘗試讓ＴＰＰ送國會審查。更急的是加拿大，十月就要大選，壓力更大。各國擔心，若不一鼓作氣完成，一旦美國失去時間壓力，整體速度就會出現「再而衰、三而竭」的困擾。這次大會談不成，各國開始找問題比較大的對手展開雙邊會談，所以絕對不能排除接下來幾週峰迴路轉完成談判的可能性。

各國加入ＴＰＰ，都有不少代價要付。因此，加入的基本思考，除了協助各自國內業者降低出口障礙外，更是設法利用ＴＰＰ這個美國主導的外力，作為推動國內改革的加壓和加速器（例如，說服血汗工廠的老闆，舊路行不通了），讓美國來對抗各國國內反對力量。在過去經驗中，這種有外來助力的改革效果，會比「國內共識」來得更快更徹底。

對台灣而言，加入ＴＰＰ，目的也何嘗不是在此。雖然台灣貪汙問題減緩，環保及勞工標準基本已符合國際標準，但是法規的透明程度還是比不上美澳，國營企業還是很多。台灣最大一次的體制改革，就是發生在十餘年前加入世貿組織（ＷＴＯ）時，開放行動電話、廢除菸酒公賣；若不讓我們自己利用國際義務再次加速這些更深層的改革，一旦等越南、馬來西亞都改革到位時，就怕為時已晚！況且ＴＰＰ沒有中國大陸的困擾，不涉及複雜而敏感的兩岸問題。所以我們也應祈禱ＴＰＰ加速完成，這樣它才能再開大門迎台灣。剩下的問題就是：台灣準備好了嗎？

Taiwan Can Help the US Adapt to Mainland China's Rise

Taiwan Can Help the US Adapt to Mainland China's Rise
China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 1, 2015
 
Executive Summary: Mainland China has risen. Some US experts prefer to the term "renaissance" to "rise". US politicians and academics differ about Taiwan. Some wish to abandon Taiwan. They think abandoning Taiwan will reduce friction with Beijing.They are even calling for the trading of strategic interests. But others think conflict between the United States and Mainland China is the result of a multitude of factors. Taiwan is merely one of many. If handled correctly, the US and the Chinese mainland need not become enemies over Taiwan. Abandoning Taiwan may appear to eliminate a strategic risk. But in fact the United States would lose an important strategic niche. Therefore they urge the United States to increase its support for Taiwan's democracy.

Full Text Below:

Mainland China has risen. Some US experts prefer to the term "renaissance" to "rise". US politicians and academics differ about Taiwan. Some wish to abandon Taiwan. They think abandoning Taiwan will reduce friction with Beijing.They are even calling for the trading of strategic interests. But others think conflict between the United States and Mainland China is the result of a multitude of factors. Taiwan is merely one of many. If handled correctly, the US and the Chinese mainland need not become enemies over Taiwan. Abandoning Taiwan may appear to eliminate a strategic risk. But in fact the United States would lose an important strategic niche. Therefore they urge the United States to increase its support for Taiwan's democracy.

Academics and politicians who support Taiwan's democracy, such as those who want Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic presidential nominee, are concerned that Taiwan is becoming too dependent on the Chinese mainland. They hope Taiwan will remain close to the US and keep the Chinese mainland at arm's length. Pro-[Mainland] China forces and China Threat theorists are tearing Taiwan apart.

During the Cold War, the United States formed alliances or security arrangements with governments from North East Asia to Southeast Asia, as well as Australia and New Zealand. This included the ROC government on Taiwan, creating an island chain encircling the Chinese mainland and the Soviet Union. The national security and economic prosperity of these nations became dependent upon the US, gradually forming a stable political and social network.

In recent years, Mainland China has risen. It has challenged the United States' sole superpower status. At the same time, it has improved cross-Strait relations. Taiwan's trade dependence on the Mainland has improved cross-Strait people to people relations. Some US think tanks and politicians have begun to rethink Taipei-Washington relations. Some advocate abandoning Taiwan. Some advocate pressuring Taiwan, forcing it to return to the United States' embrace.

How should the US treat Taiwan? Trade between Taiwan and the Mainland is exploding. Trade between Taiwan and the US is growing as well. Taiwan's population is only one fifty-eighth of the Mainland's. But imports from the US to Taiwan are one-fifth of the Mainland's. Taiwan is the US's tenth largest trading partner. Trade volume surpasses that of Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, and India, whose population is 55 times greater. Moreover, much of the merchandise the Mainland sold to the United States was manufactured on the Mainland by Taiwan manufacturers. Such achievements in economic and trade relations should be cherished.

In global high-tech production and R & D, Taiwan occupies a decisive position. In laptop computers, routers, and other equipment, Taiwan is number one in the world. In 2014, Taiwan's top 25 high-tech firms generated 120 billion USD in profits. It is the most important link in the global supply chain. Ten years ago, the 9/21 earthquake struck Taiwan. The interruption of 3C production lines underscored the Taiwan's international importance.

Taiwan's democracy has problems that need improvement. But it has completed Western style democratic reforms. It has become a template that integrates Eastern Confucianism and Western liberal democracy. Hong Kong enjoys freedom without democracy. Singapore enjoys democracy without freedom. Mainland China has implemented its own system. Only Taiwan has both. Abandoning Taiwan means abandoning the only free and democratic Chinese society. Doing so would constitute a major setback for American values.

Taiwan's international participation is limited by political reality. But Taiwan's enthusiasm remains unbounded. Its people power is even more impressive. During the Fukushima earthquake, Taiwan's contributions were the world's largest. During the Nepal earthquake, Taiwan was the first responder. According to UN data, Taiwan ranks second in the world in material assistance. During famine and flood, Taiwan has spread traditional Chinese culture the world over.

Due to historical, educational, strategic, and diplomatic factors, Taiwan has a better understanding of the United States than the Mainland. Due to cultural, historic, linguistic, and geographical factors, Taiwan has a better understanding of the Mainland than the United States. Between the United States and the Mainland, Taiwan can play a positive role, by promoting mutual understanding. Through its own wisdom, it can build trust between the United States and the Mainland. Its role is irreplaceable. Taiwan understands Japan better than the Mainland. It also understands the Mainland better than Japan. Taiwan also has an irreplaceable role between the Mainland and Japan.

Taiwan's value and achievements have special historical factors. The US factor is particularly important. The ROC recently donated funds to the Eisenhower Memorial construction fund. One reason is that during the 50s and 60s Eisenhower provided concrete support to Taiwan during its darkest hour. During his eight years in office, he personally visited Taiwan, pushed through the "Sino-US Mutual Defense Treaty," the "Formosa Resolution", and provided $1 billion USD in aid ($8 billion in today's dollars) to defending Taiwan and helping to lay the foundation for Taiwan's economic development.

Sixty years ago, the US Congress passed the "Resolution on Taiwan", and began six decades of support for Taiwan. Hu Shi and Fu Shi-nian laid down the roots of liberalism in academia. The establishment of a liberal political economy enabled Taiwan to become a template for Mainland China's future modernization. The United States should not abandon Taiwan. Nor should it force Taiwan to become America's strategic pawn, and Mainland China's enemy. The United States should accept the rise of China. It should allow Taiwan to become a buffer in relations between Mainland China and the US, enabling the two to work together to maintain world order and prosperity.

台灣是美國適應中國崛起的夥伴

2015年08月01日 中國時報

隨著中國崛起（有些美國專家主張以「復興」代替「崛起」一詞），美國政界及學術界對台灣的態度出現分歧，一些學者開始有「棄台論」的主張，認為放棄台灣可減少與北京的摩擦，甚至交換戰略利益。但也有美國學者認為，美中之間的潛在衝突是多方面的，台灣只是其一，何況只要處理得當，美中不致因為台灣而交惡。且「棄台」看似解除了一個戰略隱患，其實對美國而言，必將喪失更重要的戰略利基。因此，他們主張美國要堅定支持台灣民主。

但支持台灣民主的學者與政治人物，如正爭取民主黨提名競選總統的希拉蕊，卻憂心台灣太過依賴中國大陸，似希望台灣「親美遠中」。美國「親中派」與「恐中派」正在撕裂台灣。

冷戰時代，美國從東北亞至東南亞各國及澳紐，其中包括台灣在內，或與之有同盟關係，或建立穩固的安全合作關係，對中國大陸與蘇聯形成島鏈包圍圈，這些國家在安全與經濟上長期依賴美國，逐漸形成穩定的政治與社會關係網絡。

近年來，中國強勢崛起，對美國唯一超強地位逐漸產生威脅，同時兩岸關係逐漸改善，台灣對大陸貿易依存度漸漸提高，兩岸民間關係網絡也愈來與綿密，一些美國智庫學者及政治人物，開始重新思索台美關係，因而有人主張「棄台」，也有人主張「迫台」，要台灣重回美國懷抱。

美國應該如何看待台灣？台灣與大陸間的經貿日愈暢旺，但台美間的經貿也在成長。台灣的人口只有大陸的五十八分之一，但台灣自美進口額是大陸的五分之一強，是美國第十大貿易夥伴，超越了全球最大的石油輸出國沙烏地阿拉伯、人口是台灣55倍的印度。何況大陸的銷美商品很多係台商在大陸製造。這樣的經貿成就與實力，理應值得珍惜。

全球高科技的生產及研發，台灣舉足輕重。手提電腦、路由器等設備，台灣產量高居全球第一。2014年，25家台灣頂尖的高科技公司總產值超過1200億美元，是全球供應鏈最重要的一環。早在十餘年前，台灣發生921地震時，國際3C產品的生產線為之不安，即已說明台灣這方面的地位。

台灣的民主雖然問題叢生，有待持續發展改良，但終究在制度上已完成西式的民主改革，成為融合東方儒家文化與西方自由民主的典範。香港有自由而無民主，新加坡有民主而無自由，大陸實行自己的制度，只有台灣兩者皆備。棄台說，乃是拋棄唯一自由民主華人社會，對美國價值觀而言，應當是項重大挫敗。

台灣的國際參與受限於政治現實，但熱情及實力處處可見，民間力量更令人感動。日本福島震災，台灣捐款為舉世最高；尼泊爾震災，台灣在第一時間開赴災區，依照聯合國的數據，台灣物資援助居世界第二。人飢己飢，人溺己溺，台灣已把中華文化的傳統落實於國際關懷中。

由於歷史、教育、戰略、外交等因素，台灣比中國大陸更了解美國；而由於文化、歷史、語言、地緣等因素，台灣比美國更了解中國大陸。美中之間，台灣可發揮正面能量以促進雙方相互理解，也可藉著自身的智慧強化美、中的互信。這樣的角色與地位，無可取代。正如同台灣比大陸了解日本，也比日本了解大陸，在中日之間同樣具有不可取代的地位。

台灣的價值與成就有特殊的歷史因素，美國因素尤其重要。這幾天，中華民國捐助籌建美國艾森豪總統紀念堂，原因之一即是感謝艾帥在50與60年代以實際行動力挺台灣度過最艱困的時刻。8年任內，不但親訪台灣，且有《中美共同防禦條約》、《台灣決議案》，同時各項援助達10億美元（約合今天的80億美元），保障了台灣的安全，也奠定台灣經濟發展的基礎。

60年前，美國國會通過《台灣決議案》開始支持台灣，一甲子過去，台灣從胡適、傅斯年在大學校園紮下自由主義根基，到自由政治經濟體制的確立，未來更有機會成為中國大陸現代化的借鏡。美國既不應「棄台」，更不應該逼迫台灣成為美國的戰略棋子，與中國大陸為敵。美國應該接受中國崛起，讓台灣成為中美關係的磨合墊，中美攜手合作，共同維繫世界秩序與繁榮。