Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: Principles come before alliances

The Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) Strategy and Discourse Unit has been meeting over the past week, intensively discussing the adoption of nativized concepts as the party's central ideology. Meanwhile, Ting Shou-chung (丁守中), director of the KMT's Organization and Development Affairs Committee, claimed on Thursday that the proposed merger between the KMT and the People First Party (PFP) will be addressed soon. Evidently, the rivalry between the two KMT camps -- supporters of the conservative "Great China" ideology and those who back a nativized "Taiwan consciousness" -- is still very much alive.

Some of the topics raised and discussed by the Strategy and Discourse Unit are a pleasant surprise. The panel is co-chaired by two leading figures of the nativization camp, Deputy Chairman Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) and Wang Jin-pyng (王金平). The most impressive topic is the rejection of the "one China" ideology and the incorporation of some Taiwan independence concepts. This echoes Wang's statement before the presidential election that the KMT does not rule out the Taiwan independence option.

As for how that goal is to be accomplished, the KMT panel discussed various ideas. One was the idea of "diplomatic neutrality" by Taiwan; that is, for Taiwan to maintain an equal distance from both China and the US. However, as much as it may be an improvement over the party's current "Great China" dogma, "diplomatic neutrality" does not help the KMT circumvent the sovereignty issue. Is Taiwan a diplomatically neutral "country" or "region?" The most obvious answer is of course the former, but that would be going further than merely "not ruling out the possibility of Taiwan independence." If the answer is the latter, then the KMT would face the same ambiguity about the status of Taiwan.

Also worth noting was the panel's idea of an "independent Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu," which was offered as a way to depict the status quo. This is no different from the "ROC on Taiwan" concept embraced by the KMT when former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) was the party's chairman. However since Lee's departure from the party the KMT has long discarded that concept. If this "same wine in a different bottle" could be swallowed again, then that would surely signify a return by the party to the nativized path that Lee laid the foundation for.

Members of the Strategy and Discourse Unit and the nativization faction in general are generally moderate and pragmatic. They clearly see that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) won re-election with a "Taiwan consciousness" campaign theme. They also realize that in order for their party to have a realistic chance of playing the role of a powerful opposition party, the nativization path is the only viable option.

However, these arguments have provoked a major backlash from the "Great China" ideologists within the party. One cannot help but feel skeptical about whether the Strategy and Discourse Unit's recommendations will be adopted by the party's Central Standing Committee.

It makes sense for the KMT to first reach a consensus on its core ideologies and its future path before making any substantive moves on its pro-posed merger with the PFP. After all, a political party is supposed to comprise people with similar political ideologies. Whether the merger should be carried out should depend on whether the two parties can agree on fundamental political ideologies. Thus any attempt to push for a merger in haste is not advisable.
This story has been viewed 2221 times.