The Battle for Taiwan's Soul: The 2016 Presidential Election (1)
看2016台灣總統大選-這是為台灣精神之戰
In the past, the CCP hasn't played nicely with democratically elected DPP
leaders. What happens if Tsai Ing-wen wins?
Jonathan
Sullivan- Associate Professor of University of Nottingham, UK.
從前中國共產黨並未與經由民主選舉產生的民進黨領袖相處愉快。那麼如果蔡英文選上會怎樣?
May 3, 2015
Leaders of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP-Chinese Communist Party) and the Kuomintang (KMT) will meet in Beijing on Monday to exchange opinions on “issues of
mutual concern.” At the top of the list will be the KMT’s prospects for
presidential and legislative elections scheduled for January 2016, and
contingencies should the KMT lose.
Xi Jinping and Eric Chu’s (朱立倫-a graduate of NYU) summit is the first between respective
party leaders since 2009. It comes a year on from the first face-to-face
meeting of official representatives of the governments of the People’s Republic
of China (PRC, hereafter
China) and the Republic of China (ROC, hereafter
Taiwan) for several decades.
That symbolic breakthrough was the last
dose of positive news for the KMT and the Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration. President Ma, who
stepped down as KMT Chairman in December followingdevastating losses in local elections in November,
has witnessed a wave of social protests, a student occupation of the
legislature and the demise of an economic agreement with China that was
intended to be the keystone policy of his second and final term.
The depth of Taiwanese people’s disapproval of President Ma has severely damaged
the KMT’s chances of retaining the presidency. The scrimmage to succeed him has
exposed a lack of viable candidates and the escalation of factional battles and
grim succession politics raises the specter of splits that have historically
afflicted the party. Not only does the KMT face the impending loss of the
presidency, there is a chance that the China-leaning Pan Blue alliance in which
it is the major partner may lose control of the legislature for the first time.
It is a prospect that should provide plenty for Chu and Xi to ruminate on.
The CCP and KMT have a long and tangled
history and the contemporary impasse over Taiwan’s status and its relationship
with China is to a great extent a legacy of ideological (and at times bloody) battles between the two parties. In recent years, the two old
adversaries have discovered common ground—as they did many years ago in the
fight against Japanese imperialism. Both oppose “Taiwan independence” and both believe that increased
economic interactions are inevitable and good for Taiwan.
For some among the KMT, and unanimously
in the CCP, the hope and expectation is that economic interaction will draw the
two sides together, facilitating eventual political union. The common ground
between the CCP and KMT is embodied in the shared endorsement, if not
understanding, of the so-called “1992 Consensus” (92共識“one China, separate interpretations”-一中各表). This face-saving conceit (自欺欺人的面子問題)has proven useful as the basis for the détente policies of the last seven
years. It has also ossified as the major distinction between the DPP and KMT.
Since China’s bottom line is acceptance of the one China principle and the DPP
rejects the “1992 Consensus,” the KMT portrays itself as the only party that
can deal with China—simultaneously Taiwan’s most important economic partner and
an existential threat.
Given the KMT’s current weaknesses in
other sectors (like the economy, previously a strength), the party will try to
increase the salience of cross-Strait relations in the run up to the 2016
elections. Chu’s meeting with CCP general secretary and Chinese president Xi
Jinping helps that cause.
The KMT has attacked the DPP’s
traditional blind spot on China policy to a greater or lesser extent during
every presidential election campaign. Seeking reelection in 2012, President Ma
scored points by attacking Tsai Ing-wen’s(蔡英文) untested “Taiwan consensus.” In light of that defeat, the DPP launched a
party-wide drive to address the perceived weakness of their China policy.
The heterogeneity of positions across
the party meant that the ultimate policy recommendations did not radically
differ from the “Taiwan consensus” (which urges caution in cross-Strait affairs
and establishing bipartisan agreement and supervision before pursuing further
economic policies with China). However, Tsai, who has again secured the DPP’s
nomination, appears much more confident in her understanding and delivery of the DPP’s position.
At a party meeting in April, Tsai
expressed her support for “maintaining the status quo” and “stability in
cross-Strait relations,” remarks that won praise from officials in the
United States. Earlier this week, though, President Ma used a long address
to the Mainland Affairs Council to question how Tsai expects to achieve these
goals while rejecting the “one China” principle and “1992 Consensus.” Tsai’s
response should provide food for thought for Chu and Xi as they meet in
Beijing: the Taiwanese people, she said, do not share Ma’s preoccupation with the intricacies of the “1992 Consensus” because
they are too busy worrying about a swathe of economic and social ills.
If Tsai’s moderate rhetoric is sufficient
to convince the electorate (and opinion polls suggest it is) that the DPP’s
China policy won’t be a dangerous liability, the KMT has nothing left to fight
with. Outside of championing the “1992 Consensus,” the KMT is bereft of ideas.
While President Ma delivered ECFA and a
number of other practical, mainly economic agreements, the hopes that the CCP
put in him to bring Taiwan and China closer together face a substantial setback. Suspicion of the KMT’s quick embrace of China and the failure of
promised dividends coincides with surveys showing record (and increasing)
levels of self-identification as Taiwanese and support for preserving Taiwan’s
autonomy and continued separation from China.
Condensed from News Media 新聞轉載
05/07/2015
沒有留言:
張貼留言