Print

Mail

wiki links

The DPP's 'one China' economics

`Whether the DPP, which continues to support relaxing economic regulations [with China], can still be considered a pro-localization party is a valid question.'

ON A RECENT political talk show, a commentator criticized the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) in heated terms for failing to lend its support to Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate. The commentator insisted that this is an indication that the TSU has strayed from pro-localization principles, and he advised voters to abandon the TSU. This scene filled me with dejection.

Demanding that DPP members lend their support to Hsieh is a given, and there is nothing wrong with demanding the same of non-partisan candidates. But to demand support from another political party shows a lack of common sense regarding party politics.

In a normal democratic system, unless a candidate is co-nominated or parties have cooperative agreements, a party will not easily lend its support to another party's candidate, especially as the TSU is gambling its political future on the single district election format.

Even if a party does not have its own candidate, it should not easily lend its support to the candidate of another party, which is a normal way for a party to maintain its character and independence, as well as a basic criterion for staying on its own political path.

Parties are different because of different goals. This difference prohibits a party from supporting another party's path and candidate. Hence, even after Saturday's legislative elections, from the perspective of integrity, the TSU is under no obligation to support the DPP candidate. For instance, the DPP candidate's economic policy is in favor of direct links and the relaxation of regulations for trade with China, the cancellation of the 40 percent cap on China-bound investments, and a positive view of economic unification.

These policies are diametrically opposed to the TSU's economic policy of joining with the West (i.e. the US and Japan) and opposing increasing reliance on China. With such a divergence of opinion, how can the TSU abandon its own goals to support a "one China" economy platform?

Commentators demand that the TSU lend its support to the DPP candidate prior to the presidential election based on the argument of preventing a split in the pan-green camp -- in other words, not lending support is tantamount to creating a split and betraying pro-localization principles. But we must understand that politics is a kind of compromise, and a kind of communication, where large parties should respect small parties.

If the DPP ignores the TSU's platform, and insists only on following its own and demanding unconditional support, and even tries to marginalize the TSU using the extreme opposition between pan-green and pan-blue camps so that it can dominate the pan-green territory, then the DPP itself would endanger the solidarity of pro-localization forces. As for how to communicate, compromise, and garner support -- the ball is in the DPP's court, and success depends on the wisdom of the leader of the larger party.

In the current situation where 80 percent of Taiwan's foreign investment goes to China and the level of economic dependence has reached 40 percent, whether the DPP, which continues to support relaxing economic regulations, can still be considered a pro-localization party is a valid question.

We must understand that political tendencies toward unification or independence often oscillate rapidly due to sudden and isolated factors. The economy, however, is different in that it is difficult to alter economic tendencies toward unification or independence over a short span of time. This is why China has long since deployed economic policy as a primary tool for advancing unification.

Political paths can be examined: the TSU, which has insisted on Taiwanese independence, a new constitution, changing the national title, entering the UN, economic unity with Western nations and opposing a relaxation of regulations toward China is undoubtedly a pro-localization party.

The TSU has previously played a key role in protecting Taiwan's interests in terms of issues such as permitting eight-inch wafer factories and banks to move to China, allowing the importation of Chinese towels and clothing and relaxing regulations on China-bound investments.

In this respect, the existence of the TSU is pivotal to whether the DPP can remain a pro-localization party.

Without the TSU, if the DPP follows its current "confident opening" path toward China, regardless of its cries for entering the UN and for writing a new constitution, Taiwan's future will still be that of the pan-blue camp's eventual unification.

Hopefully pro-localization voters will think not only of forcing the TSU to support the DPP candidate. The ball is in the DPP's court: if the DPP fails to garner TSU support, the failure would be a warning sign, and a consequence of the DPP's insistence on pursuing a "one China economy" path.

Huang Tien-lin is a former national policy adviser.

TRANSLATED BY ANGELA HONG
This story has been viewed 1719 times.