Mr. 曹 Has A Very Good Point

http://www.libertytimes.com.tw/2011/new/jan/2/today-p4.htm

Mr. 曹長青 has a very good point, especially the following paragraph is once again a very good warning:

如果民進黨的中國政策最後也是向中國傾斜,以所謂「不讓國民黨壟斷」,要讓北京聽到民進黨的聲音為由,也爭相跑去北京,那麼在這場「傾斜中國」的比賽中,民進黨一定是輸家。因為民進黨不管怎麼傾斜,都比不過國民黨。事實上,北京對台灣的情況相當瞭解,並不存在不瞭解民進黨的問題。那些提出「不讓國民黨壟斷」的人,其實只是為他們「傾斜中國」的企圖找藉口。綠營的一位高層人士來美國演講時,曾擬定講題「調整兩岸關係,縮短兩黨距離」,說白了,就是要民進黨高層也往中國跑,要民進黨的中國政策朝向國民黨。在五十步笑百步的情況下,誰是贏家呢?

Once again, people in Taiwan (both KMT and DPP) have to realize the nature of CCP.  CCP is a dictator that attempts to build a “China Centric” world and holding on its power tightly.  But most importantly, like what Mr. 曹 said, THEY ARE NOT MORONS, so don’t treat them like one.

The accusation of a few DPP members being 傾斜中國 might not necessarily be true.  However, the human mind is a complex thing that can change in an instance, and who is to say there are not some truth in this statement.  Certainly, in the past, both DPP and TSU (Taiwan Solitary Union) have many traitorous members and Chinese centric thinkers (許信良、陳文茜、賴幸媛,just to name a few).

Advertisements

6 comments so far

  1. Echo on

    I think Mr. 曹長青 is wrong on this.

    1. China knows that the DPP under Tsai is a force to be reckoned with, especially after the 5-city election. The possibility of Ma losing to Tsai in 2012 is there. That means, if Beijing wants to make use of Ma to speed up the annexation, they have less than 2 years. After 2012, nothing is certain.

    Thus, they need to play some tricks to show Ma that he is not their only card. Both awarding Lien Chan a peace price and building a channel with the DPP are alternatives they can use to squeeze more juice outta Ma.

    So, I believe that Beijing will be very interested in talking with the DPP. In fact, they might be more eager then DPP is, ‘cos they don’t have much time.

    2. TI supporters have been isolated themselves from any possible interactions with their enemy (including KMT and CCP) for decades. It results in serious consequences: they don’t really know what the enemy is thinking; they don’t really know how good or bad their enemy is; they don’t have any training /experiences on negotiations, thus no personnel to use when needed… just to name a few.

    In terms of international relationship, refusing to talk puts TIers into a very bad situation: they are viewed as a bunch of narrow-minded, limited vision, non-practical ideologists who have no intention to get along.

    Of cause, the sources of problems are (1) the bullying China, (2) fueled with western journalists who don’t do homework.

    But, if these two factors keep going (and indeed they do and have no sign of stopping), the only solution for TIers is to come out of the nutshell and fight back on their turf.

    I admire 曹長青 very much for his insisting on the value of democracy and his true love on people. However, he has made quite a few wrong assessments in terms of cross-straight relationship. His extreme mindset leads him to distort Tsai’s “talk without any pre-condition (不預設立場與中國談判)” to “giving up principles (放棄立場)” He is among those extreme TIers who seem to have one mentality in common:

    “Don’t talk to them. If you do, you become them!”

    I feel insulted, ‘cos to me that’s equivalent to saying “they are not morons, but you are”.

    曹長青 knows CCP better than most, if not any, TI supporters. If we were to find a negotiation representative, he should have been the best, for his in depth knowledge about the CPP. Unfortunately, his exclusive mindset makes him the worst.

  2. dixteel on

    Echo,

    Note the point of Mr. 曹 is not about having no policy, but about whether DPP will have a China leaning and China centric policy. Because the reasoning given by some DPP members about their China policy sounds naivy at best. “Letting China knows what the other half of Taiwanese think etc.” is not good enough. Chinese officials know what we want (even if majority of Chinese population doesn’t), they just don’t like it. Do you think just by talking to CCP, somehow CCP will say “Yes, I can see now that you are an independent nation and should join the international community etc. Furthermore, I will not threatening you with arms and coercion etc.”

    Also, whatever this policy is, it has to be under the supervision of Taiwanese. People who voted for KMT did not vote them to do what they are doing now: party to party negotiation without supervision. DPP should not get a big head like KMT after some election win and think that it can fully represent the interests of Taiwanese.

    Furthermore, like I said, DPP is not without turncoats. Look at 楊秋興. He can turn 180 degrees over night. Imagine him talking to the CCP officials.

    And for those foreigners who think TIs are narrow minded, tell them to look at how their own policy fairs so far. For example, the 6 Party Talks – complete failure. They are no experts in negotiating with China, so don’t accuse us for not doing it or not doing it better.

    Also, in strategy, sometimes it is just best not to play by the other guys rule, because doing so is like going to a casino: you think you have a chance to win, but mathematically you will certainly loss.

    In any case, I think this is just warnings, not stop sign. DPP should do what it thinks is right, but be really really careful. The whole future of Taiwan might rest upon it.

  3. Echo on

    All what you said is valid. But, for the argument’s sake, lets assume a spectrum for the cross-strait talk, from deep green to red:

    A.No contact at all;
    B.Negotiate but hold ground of Taiwan-centric;
    C.Negotiate but favoring China’s need;
    D.Totally tilting to China

    Deep green insists staying on A, ‘cos they fear that once they step out of A, they will go to C and D straight.

    That is, they don’t see the possibility of B — talk, but hold ground.

    With that mentality, they assume everyone else is as incapable as they are. So whenever they see someone starts to step out of A, they immediately jump to the conclusion of betraying, even to an extreme that they accuse those starting to talk are already in C or even D.

    I have been putting some efforts trying to clear some rumors they spread in the past couple of months. For example, some TIers spread rumors that Tsai Ing-wen is pro-annexation, that the DPP under her lead will be much more “pro-annexation” than Ma Ying-jeou is, etc.

    As for Mr.曹, if my memory serves me right, “no pre-condition is to give up principles” (不預設立場就是放棄立場) was what he said earlier. It is a distortion and should be criticized.

    I understand very well about the threats of CCP and the value of warning. I am aware of 楊秋興’s case, as well as those of 許榮淑’s and 范振宗’s。 But Taiwan needs to find a way to survive. Some deep TIers treat everyone as incapable person such that the only way to survive is to hide inside the nutshell. For that they don’t mind spreading rumors to deliver threats. From my point of view, that can only lock TI further into a corner of self-destruction.

  4. dixteel on

    B is a possibility, but we have to be realistic. China has more cards in its hand, do you really want to play with it? You have to find a way to play it by your own rules or not play it at all. Also, historically, CCP consistently comes out on top after negotiation. (IE, CCP gains much more than its opponents) DPP really needs a very strong case to convince us that it can do better than KMT, UK and the US government.

    “Taiwan needs to find a way to survive.” Agree, but Taiwan is not dying neither. And Taiwan cannot just survive, but it has to prosper. The point is though, does the path of survival and prosperity necessarily means option B or inclusion of option B? Or are there other option that is even more attractive? DPP cannot fall into a mind set that negotiation is the only option, because negotiation might not lead to anywhere.

    Also, to me, the more pressing matter with Taiwan’s survival and prosperity lies within Taiwan itself, not outside of it. DPP should look into its China policy, but it should not think like KMT, that Taiwan’s future relies on China. (That is an extremely weak position for negotiation) Focus in first, then Taiwan can have a much stronger position during negotiation with others.

  5. Echo on

    Thanks for the reply. I’ve all my arguments up there, so I won’t add more.

    • dixteel on

      Thanks for the comments. Always nice to have a discussion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: