That was the whole plan

Obviously.

Tsai for Prez?

Tomorrow, DPP Chair Tsai Ying-wen is likely to announce her plans to run for President. I'm happy to see it and expect a (survey based, not voting based) primary that pits Su Chen-chang against Tsai, with Annette Lu Hsiu-lien's run being little more than a side show -- and I'd bet she'd run as an independent if she doesn't lose the nomination.

And in fact I would expect it to be a very close contest between Su and Tsai. My own preference would be to see Su come out on top as I feel he's a more capable campaigner. And the two of them on the same ticket would be powerful despite their common Pingtung origin. I say that because Mayoral elections showed that both Su and Tsai have surprisingly robust bases in the north that Lu or other contenders can't really match.

Two major questions for the DPP: one, can they articulate three or four problems with KMT domestic policy and "fixes"  that resonate with the public? And two, can they articulate a "One Side, One Country" policy stance that leaves room for China to decide to maintain current relations?

DPP thinks it up

The DPP just officially established a pair of think tanks.The Taipei Times reports:

The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) yesterday introduced two new think tanks to enhance its policy initiatives while strengthening dialogue with China and the rest of the world....

The Economic and Social Affairs Research Center and the Security and Strategy Research Center are part of the party’s revamped New Frontier Foundation, created under former DPP chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄), and include retired government ministers and former representatives abroad.

The value of these think tanks as mechanisms for dialogue with China should not be underestimated. A great deal of communication and probing is done through academic channels and the DPP could use a few more of those in formulating it's China stance.

At the ceremony for the founding of the think tanks, DPP Chair Tsai Ing-wen also gave a speech about cross strait policy. While short on details about the future, Tsai's speech did place the cross-strait relationship through the lens of the international community and she sees Taiwan's current status as a result of modern East Asian history (read: not merely a Chinese civil war). She rejected political preconditions for discussions (read: One China) but said Taiwan must do it's part to maintain peace and stability across the strait (read: maintain dialogue with China). These think tanks are part of that effort.

I'm psyched about the think tanks and imaginative policy initiatives, but I wonder if the DPP can come to any further internal consensus on Taiwan's status and future which will be received warmly by Beijing. Unfortunately, Beijing holds the veto on that and has no reason to show flexibility with the DPP right now when things are going so swimmingly with the KMT. 

Su's "Taiwan Consensus"

I fully expect Su Chen-chang's phrase of "Taiwan Consensus" will end up defining the DPP position vis-a-vis the KMT come 2012, though I imagine we can expect some internal wrangling between heavy weights for a share of the credit.

Su's statement is summerized in this article:

蘇貞昌認為，台灣歷經四次總統直選，是主權獨立的國家，不隸屬於中華人民共和國，依據憲法，目前名稱是中華民國，改變現狀要全民同意，已是全體國人最大的共識。

Su Chen-chang believes that Taiwan has had four direct presidential elections; that it is a sovereign and independent country,  not part of the People's Republic of China; that according to the constitution, the national name is currently the Republic of China; that changing the status quo [thus defined] must be agreed to by the people as a whole; and that these points already form the broadest consensus [of cross-strait relations] in the country.

Is there a '92 consensus?

We all know the answer is no, and the evidence is in the open every day.

When Ma talks about the importance of the '92 consensus and "One China, two interpretations" to cross-strait relations, China reports it positively, but without mentioning the "One China, two interpretations" part. And it's considered a "good first step" by the Ma administration to tell public officials to refer to China as "the mainland" or "the other side" of the strait.

Thanks, President Ma, for reminding us that Taiwan officials should never use "China" but only "mainland" or "the other side of the Strait" when referring to the PRC.

Frowny face

Saddest part about the Lien Shengwen shooting: when obvious reality conflicts with the rhetoric of political parties, reality loses in the reporting of the news. Apparently the parties would prefer to pretend Lien's shooting was not a case of mistaken identity despite all evidence to the contrary. Way to inflame things, guys.

Rate of posts

You might have noticed my posting rate is way down. This is largely due to me being out of Taiwan and therefore less into the daily political news cycle than I once was. We've been in TX about a year now and it's clearly taken a toll on my blogging.

I feel OK about this, though, considering how well David Reid, Michael Turton, Ben Gordon, Dixteel and Frozen Garlic have been doing on their individual blogs -- not to mention the careful daily attention that goes into posts at Taiwan Matters!

I'll still post my feelings and thoughts as time goes on. I guess I have to ask if anyone would be interested in a slight repositioning of this blog to include US or Texas issues. If so, the post frequency could go up a bit!

Liar?

It seems to me the DPP never manages to call out Ma on the major omission when he claims "Taiwan's future will be decided by its 23 million people," which is that the mechanism for that decision is left unspecified.

I've always been a fan of tying the referendum to that decision , and that's the DPP official policy. But they always seem to forget it to mention it when they criticism Ma on these things. Instead, they call him a liar. To me, the result is the DPP caucus sounds like shrill paranoids.

Happy New Year

Hu Jintao's New Years address, again calling for coerced peaceful unification under "one country, two systems," went unnoticed by most of the blue media which has tried to pretend that China's thrown unification and "one country two systems" out the window.

Meanwhile, the DPP's attempts to equate the KMT and CCP's position on "One China" doesn't seem to garner public attention, and I'm wondering if they won't somehow manage to lose this battle of definitions on the "'92 consensus", which would set the stage for losing the important political contests.

If I were the DPP, I might just minimize using the unclear phrase "'92 consensus" and stick with another couple of slogans: Reject One China 拒絕一中 and also Taiwanese independence is the status quo. Protect the status quo. 台獨就是兩岸現況 維持現況

Or something like that.

New Year's musing: do you remember when the KMT claimed that combining the legislative and presidential election, and making the terms equally wrong, would have been unconstitutional? I do. And then do you remember when they went ahead and did it?

Argh!

This article [CN] shows everything that's wrong with the DPP message on cross-strait relations. President Ma Ying-jeou recently made a big deal about that DPP policy in an interview with media, and there he rhetorically asked Tsai Ying-wen if the DPP accepted the 92 consensus.

Tsai responded by saying how the 92 consensus doesn't exist; just ask President Lee Teng-hui or Koo Chen-fu, Lee's President of the Straits Exchange Foundation and the man who would have been in charge of any talks held under a "'92 consensus."

But Tsai completely misses the larger point, namely, that the DPP cannot accept the '92 consensus because of its definition. The '92 consensus is defined as "Taiwan and China both belong to One China," and the KMT government likes to add a flourish: "The Republic of China is that One China."

No matter which definition you use, it does not reflect reality and it is not at all reasonable. Nor does it reflect the average Taiwanese person's opinion.

If the DPP could remember that not everyone watches their political talk shows every day, maybe they'd realize how few people could tell you off hand what the '92 consensus is. And it's the act of getting that definition out which will win people over to the DPP's side.

Wikileak memos

The Wikileaks release of the diplomatic cables has been accompanied by lots of government grandstanding, but I get the distinct impression that very few real secrets are contained in these documents. As usual, it seems we classify a lot more things than really need to be classified, just to save face. Mostly our own.

And for me, this reinforces the idea that these "secrets" are open topics between the various governments involved; what upsets these officials is that we normal citizens now see what they're talking about behind closed doors. It goes to show how far removed the people are from their "own" governments.

There may be real security implications, but I can't help but feeling the elite all over the world are mostly just miffed that someone broke through their curtain and showed some mostly harmless backroom dealings and offhand comments.

I plan on reading the memos rather extensively for fun.

I thought the police were no longer providing crowd estimates like this one for the recent KMT march. But Hau seems happy with the estimate of 70,000 people.

I'm very excited about watching results for the election roll in -- I will probably make a night of it over here in the States. Or at least a very early morning.

Gag

So Honorary KMT chairman and general nitwit Lien Chan (連戰) got to meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao at APEC this year; when talking to the media back in Taiwan, Lien had this to say:

另外，由於明年建國百年，也是辛亥革命百年，大陸國家主席胡錦濤也說，大陸會有隆重紀念活動。

連戰認為，雖然兩岸不可能一起舉辦，但是殊途同歸，歸於國父孫中山先生的精神、思想和主義。

In addition, since next year marks the 100th anniversary of the Xinhai Revolution [the 1911 revolution that established the R.O.C.], mainland Chinese Chairman Hu Jintao also said the mainland will hold commemorative activities.

Lien Chan thinks that although it won't be possible for the two sides of the strait to hold the celebration together, they will arrive at the same destination through different routes, ultimately honoring national father Sun Yat-sen's spirit, thinking and ideology.

Quaint & comically harmless thinking, or ominous?

Negotiating with a ghost

This is pretty funny:

黃光國：「兩岸最大的問題是中共始終不願意面對『中華民國』仍然存在的事實──你不承認『中華民國』，硬是把我當成『鬼』，但兩岸談判、簽署文件總要有對象，難倒你是在跟『鬼』交涉？！」．．． －「兩岸智庫如何攜手共創未來」研討會／台大社科院、2010.11.2

"The biggest problem in cross strait relations is the Chinese Communists' consistent refusal to face the reality that the Republic of China still exists. You refuse to recognize the ROC and insist on treating me as a ghost. But cross strait dialogue and agreements ultimately have to be discussed or signed with somebody, unless of course you are negotiating with a ghost!" -- Hwang Kwang-Kuo [NTU Psych professor] at a think tank discussion conference on cross strait relations at NTU, 11/2/2010.

Professor Hwang's comment apparently drew plenty of laughs from the crowd, but sober and silent reactions from the Chinese delegation of intellectuals, whose think-tanks can obviously not suggest recognizing the ROC unless the Party leadership first makes a decision.