Taiwan's new leaders must tread carefully

Prior to Taiwan’s second transfer of power on May 20, president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has promised to consider non-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) members for the Judicial Yuan, Examination Yuan and the Control Yuan, and a native Taiwanese to head the Straits Exchange Foundation.

This expression of goodwill is an attempt to heal the social rift following a fierce election battle, but That this is not what concerns the pan-green camp.

Pro-green are more concerned about the future development of cross-strait relations, transitional justice and the pan-blue camp’s treatment of the leaders of the current government and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).

From a cross-strait perspective, Ma’s victory is a relief to Beijing but a concern for the green camp, since there is strong support both for “one country on each side” and “one China, with each side making its own interpretation.”

How can a balance be struck? More importantly, Beijing stresses “one China” while Taipei stresses “each side making its own interpretation.”

The international community accepts the former, but not the latter, making it difficult for Taiwan to join international organizations, although some countries pay lip service to “one China” while allowing the Republic of China (ROC) to establish unofficial representative offices and maintain membership in a few international organizations by calling itself an area.

“One China” is a curse both diplomatically and domestically. For example, at some international sports and cross-strait events in Taiwan, the host nation cannot even raise its own national flag. Also, in the 2005 meetings between Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), neither Lien nor Soong mentioned democracy or the ROC, thus highlighting the pressure created by the “one China” principle. The question of how to get Beijing to step back and the Ma administration to move forward on a foundation trusted by the Taiwanese public is a challenge.

Although Taiwanese want to safeguard national awareness while longing for cross-strait stability, they understand the implied conflict. It will be Ma’s job to strike a balance that promotes the nation’s interests. Regardless of which direction he takes, it will be acceptable to most Taiwanese unless he is overly biased. If, however, pan-green supporters are worried, they might launch protests that could lead to questions being asked by moderate voters. To build long-term calm and stability, Ma should move slowly and promote transparency.

As for the treatment of pan-green leaders, the handling of the president’s special state affairs fund is a good example. These funds are similar in nature to the special allowance of government officials and prosecutors should treat them according to one standard. Furthermore, media outlets have been discussing whether Ma should pardon President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), causing pan-green supporters to wonder whether Chen’s lawsuit has been completed.

Chen, who is about to step down and become a private citizen, has the same right to be presumed innocence until proven guilty as everyone else. Even if the suggestion of a pardon is made out of goodwill, it is an insult to pan-green supporters. Ma must allow all cases to be handled by an independent judiciary.

Both camps are edgy and tense, which can easily lead to deteriorating relations. We have to rely on the open mindedness and reconciliatory abilities of the two camps’ leaderships, who should tread with caution.

Lee Wen-chung is a former DPP legislator.

Translated by Eddy Chang