20040417

=======

The momentum for reform on April 17, 2004 ……

Don't fret over cross-strait relations

`When Taiwan writes a new constitution, it should be more advanced than that of the US was 200 years ago. Issues irrelevant to the constitution, like the national flag and territory, could be left out.'

By Ruan Ming

During the presidential campaign, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's supporters spread many rumors, for instance saying that if President Chen Shui-bian was re-elected, China would invade Taiwan and so forth. Although these lies are self-evident, some people are still doubtful about the future relations between Taiwan, the US and China.

Three sentences sum up the Taiwan-US-China relationship:

The peaceful status quo must not be changed.

The progress of democracy must not be reversed.

The trend of future development must not be withheld.

Let's discuss the first point. Lien has distorted and capitalized on a statement made by US President George Bush -- "The comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally, to change the status quo, which we oppose."

Upon hearing this remark, the Lien camp was flushed with excitement, assuming the US intended to dump A-bian and save Lien. This fever did not ease even after Lien's defeat. Before the White House issued congratulations to Chen, Hu Chung-hsin, claiming himself to be the author of Chen's biography Son of Taiwan, still instigated the public during call-in shows, calling on the US to declare Chen's re-election invalid and to supervise another election. In other words, the Lien camp schemed to use the US to push the Taiwanese people to dump A-bian and save Lien.

Poor Lien: with his doctorate in political science from the University of Chicago, he lacks not only the most basic world view but also the ability to interpret Bush's comments. Lien has become a puppet in the hands of political tricksters like Hu.

In fact, Bush's remarks signal a shift in the US Taiwan Strait strategy. Contrary to the Clinton administration's "strategically ambiguous" Taiwan policy, Bush has adopted an adamant and clear stance -- "We oppose any unilateral actions that would change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait," he has said.

First, Bush unmistakably told Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, "If you try to use force or coercion against the Taiwanese, we're going to be there." Later, in a background briefing, White House officials reiterated that Bush's statements are in line with his earlier promise made in April 2001, "We would do whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend itself," a promise they said remains in effect. Furthermore, after the March 20 election the US Defense Department announced that Washington will sell an advanced radar system to Taiwan, integrating Taiwan into the US defense network in Asia.

Second, the US also warned Taiwan in equally clear terms that it’s in no way abandoning support for Taiwan's democracy or for freedom, but it opposes any unilateral decision by Taiwan to change the status quo. The reason is that the US goal is to maintain the peace in the Taiwan Strait.

Abiding by these principles, democracy and peace, tallies with the common interests shared by the US and Taiwan. China's attempt to alter Taiwan's independent sovereignty by threats of military force would be thwarted by these two principles. These two principles are the guarantee of stability and peace in the Strait. Besides, Beijing's leaders are also willing to accept these principles. Therefore, any pessimism about the outlook for a peaceful Strait is groundless.

My second point is that the progress of democracy cannot be reversed.

Some people worry about the writing of a new constitution in 2006, the referendum and the enforcement of the new constitution in 2008. Other concerns include whether China will use force against Taiwan and whether the US will abandon Taiwan.

The key is how to persist in the two related principles of democracy and peace. Former senior director for Asian affairs at the US National Security Council James Moriarty addressed the issue of Taiwan's new constitution in a recent interview with Hong Kong-based Phoenix TV.

Saying that he had worked in various countries and different political institutions, including Taiwan, Moriarty called attention to the exceedingly wide scope of the Consitution and its narrow range of application. The people in Taiwan should have a better constitution, Moriarty went on to say, which will improve the operation of Taiwan's democracy. He also added that no one can assert that Taiwan does not have the right to have its own good, functional and modern constitution.

The question is, he continued, if it is necessary to go beyond that scope. Changing Taiwan's official title and national flag would be entering into territory the US government deems inappropriate, since the US does not think Taiwan would need to make these nominal changes to complete and improve Taiwan's democracy.

There is no such thing as the US opposing Taiwan's referendums or the writing of a new constitution. The US government previewed Chen's speech draft on the issues of referendum and constitutional reform. Did the US voice any opposition? What concerns the US is peace, and the US opposes any unilateral action to change the status quo to maintain the peace in the Strait, not to oppose Taiwan's constitutional reform or referendums, which will complete and enhance Taiwan's democracy.

Taiwan need not alter its de facto status quo as an independent state. What the people of Taiwan require is a good, functional and modern constitution of their own, one that applies to the current situation in this free country. The Constitution of the Republic of China was established neither in Taiwan nor for Taiwan.

Rather, it was established in China for China. This Constitution mixes a Cabinet system with a presidential system, and a "Five Powers" system (the executive, the legislature, the judiciary, the Examination Yuan and the Control Yuan) with a "Three Powers" system (administration, legislation and jurisdiction). Not only is the Constitution unsuited for the current situation in Taiwan, it has never reflected Taiwan's history, either.

A new constitution is a necessary step for Taiwan's democratic progress. A new constitution should provide a thorough protection of citizens' rights and an effectively balanced national powers. In my opinion, the US Constitution could serve as our model. With its concise wording, clear principles, and flexibility of interpretation, the entire US Constitution contains only seven articles and 4,600 words.

When Taiwan writes a new constitution, it should be more advanced than that of the US was 200 years ago. Issues like citizens' social and economic rights should be incorporated. Also, issues irrelevant to the constitution, like the national flag and territory, could be left out, as in the US Constitution. The writing of a new constitution is merely aimed to strengthen the nation's democracy, and this is the right that the people of Taiwan cannot be deprived of. No one and no country can oppose this.

My third point is that the trend of future development must not be withheld. The new Chinese leaders, President Hu Jintao and Wen, are more pragmatic compared to former president Jiang Zemin and former premier Zhu Rongji. Their attention is on China's domestic affairs, and they are not in a hurry to resolve the "Taiwan problem." On March 14, Wen proposed "our utmost efforts" regarding the Taiwan issue during a press conference after the annual session of the 10th National People's Congress in Beijing:

First, China will exert its utmost effort to safeguard stability across the Taiwan Strait.

Second, China will exert its utmost effort to push for the opening of direct cross-strait links, as well as economic, cultural and personnel exchanges between the two sides.

Third, China will exert its utmost effort to strive for an early resumption of cross-strait dialogue and negotiations under the "one-China" principle.

Fourth, China will exert its utmost effort to advance the cause of peaceful unification.

The first statement of maintaining stability across the Strait means not to change the status quo unilaterally. This tallies with the interests of Taiwan, China and the US, and is able to ensure peace across the Strait. However, the third and fourth aspects are where the major divergences between the two sides lie, as no consensus has been reached yet.

The promotion of either the "one China" principle or cross-strait unification will not only change the status quo of Taiwan as an independent sovereign state, but also damage the Chinese people's pursuit of freedom and democracy. Taiwan managing to maintain its independent democratic development is perhaps the greatest support for the Chinese people's pursuit of freedom and democracy.

What the two sides can jointly work on is the second aspect. The future development of cross-strait relations lies in economic cooperation and trade, cultural exchange, environmental protection and other key areas -- not in the political or military arenas. This trend in future development is unstoppable. It is inappropriate for Taipei to negotiate political and military frameworks with Beijing before the realization of China's democratization. Either political or military negotiations with China in this phrase will extend the length of the Chinese Communist Party military hegemony. It will also help Beijing's "hawk" faction, led by Jiang, to block China's various reforms.

Taiwan insists on democracy, peace and the maintenance of the status quo of its sovereignty. This tallies not only with the global security strategy of the Bush administration but also with the US peaceful cross-strait strategy -- which opposes any unilateral change in the status quo. Since the US will support it, and China is unable to object, the second proposal may be the best future development strategy for Taiwan.

My conclusion is: from today to the year 2020, Taiwan and China should develop all-round non-governmental exchanges concerning economics, culture, education, tourism, environmental protection and other issues. Only by doing so can Taiwan expand its democratic influence over China while helping the Chinese people to achieve an all-around "well-off society." As for cross-strait political and military relations, they should be put aside temporarily before 2020, and be discussed according to the political changes in China.

China has always wanted to push for unification through cross-strait exchanges. Taiwan can use such exchanges to promote the development of freedom and democracy in China, and to push Beijing to terminate its "party-state" system, so that it can walk toward freedom and democracy eventually.

Ruan Ming is a visiting professor at Tamkang University and was a special assistant to former Chinese Communist Party Secretary-General Hu Yaobang.

-----------------------------------------

On April 17, 2004 ……

Seize the momentum for reform

While the opposition is still entangled with post-election political disputes and its own problems of power redistribution, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has initiated inter-party reform with proposals it introduced last week. These electoral reforms aim at eliminating factional manipulation of party members and paving the way for more fair and open competition.

The DPP's attempts at internal reform not only displayed the party's capacity for self-examination but also demonstrated that President Chen Shui-bian has the strength of personality needed to get the country back on the right track.

The art of leadership is to maintain sufficient momentum to steer public policy without losing public support. An idealistic leader will not hesitate to do something unpopular. But a smart idealist will carefully measure public opinion before he does so, and will develop a strategy to persuade the electorate.

Ill outcomes result when timid, tepid governance leaves initiatives to the opposition. This reduces a political leader to a gambler, dependent on good times and luck to take him where he wants to go. The Chen administration has learned a great lesson from opposition boycotts and from its own mistakes in four years.

With a new mandate, the ruling party should reconstruct its contract with the people and try to convince them that the nation is heading in the right direction. By incorporating reforms, the DPP opened a gate to remold Taiwanese politics toward mature democracy.

The DPP's primary system has long been criticized by the public because it breeds factional nepotism. When the party won a second presidential election, the leadership introduced reforms that position the DPP as the foremost hope to deepen democracy in the country.

After his first term, Chen recognized the enormous difficulties involved in forging a national consensus on key policy areas, and the recent election has further polarized political forces.

To govern successfully, Chen must avoid serving his own party's extremists and ideologues. He must transcend party interests and appeal to political moderates, seeking common ground. If he can transcend special interests, then he can win primaries in his own party by appealing to moderate rank-and-file voters.

In politics, the most lethal wounds are inflicted from the rear. An elected president who seeks to reach beyond his party's base and appeal to the swing voters his electoral fortunes depend on invites assault from his own ranks.

Facing domestic and external challenges, Chen must display a stronger will to take care of majority interests, not just those of his own party. It is from the center that leaders must lead. Each party has its own center that is more moderate than its leaders or its campaign donors. By reaching out to that center, an elected leader can escape being the prisoner of his own party stalwarts.

Chen must keep in mind that leadership is a dynamic tension between where a politician thinks his country should go and where voters want it to go. Bold initiatives that leave the voters behind are not acts of leadership but of self-indulgent arrogance. The key is not to abjure change but to seek it with political wisdom and skills of persuasion.

Self-initiated and incessant reform is the most responsible way of building public trust in the DPP. The ruling party has served as a good example of this so far. How will the opposition meet the same challenge?

-----------------------------------------