And "Xi Lianhui andrdquo; a total of four times, Lien Chan proposed Andrdquo; and Chinese leaders also mentioned" the new four Andrdquo; and the national and Communist policy will continue to dominate the development of cross -strait relations;Andrdquo; but subject to the lack of Andrdquo; "1992 consensus andrdquo;" the DPP's role in cross -strait relations is gradually marginalized due to the lack of "1992 consensus andrdquo;Indirectly responded to Andrdquo;
Liu Jincai
At the National Party Member Congress of the Democratic Progressive Party on July 15 this year, there were pragmatic party representatives for the third time proposal to authorize the authorization of the Central Executive Council.Through the "referendum Taiwan independence party platform" (claiming the establishment of the Republic of Taiwan), in 1999, passed the "Taiwan's Future Resolution" (based on the Republic of China as the National Number), and the "Normal State Resolution" in 2007 (revealed the referendum system and Taiwan's authentic name), Tsai Ing -wen finalized Andrdquo;.
At the same time, the Audit Party representative proposal, countering China's oppression of airlines to change Taiwan's sovereignty attempts and swallowing Taiwan cases, and also instructed Andrdquo; two cases were almost coldly treated.The debate platform has also lost the opportunity to deliver goodwill olive branches.
Like the 2016 and 2017 full -generation conferences, the pragmatic proposal will incorporate Andrdquo; at the same time, the radical proposal advocates that Taiwan is not independent and the Republic of China has been abolished.Differential routes with radicals do not launch a rational debate in the public domain. This is the DPP's important routes of the DPP.The internal harmony is inevitable to be evaluated by Andrdquo;
The DPP is the current ruling party. It is almost fully governing the administrative power and legislative power at the same time.. AND "Maintain the status quo Andrdquo; It is Cai Yingwen's campaign that has not become a new party outline or new resolution, and cannot be consistent with the government level policies and political parties.In addition to the harmony and stability of the party in the party, I am afraid that they will also be questioned by the basic teaching school and cannot promote the substantial transformation of the Cross -Strait policy of the Democratic Progressive Party.
Swelling between maintaining the status quo and legal independence
First of all, the cross -strait policies of the Democratic Progressive Party are swinging between maintaining the status quo and legal independence.This structural contradiction is rooted in the conflict of the target of the one -party platform and the two resolutions.New constitution and participation in international organizations in the name of Taiwan.The party platform claims to pursue independence of the country, and a decision article claims to recognize the Republic of China and another resolution to pursue Taiwan's authentic name and normal country. The ultimate goal of the party's policy is different, causing the structural tension and conflict of policies.
The Democratic Progressive Party's gentle and pragmatic proposal advocates the "maintaining the status quo andrdquo; into the party's platform to replace the" referendum Taiwan independence party platform "," Taiwan future resolution ", and" normal state resolution documents ".The consensus of Taiwan, strengthening the stable image of the peaceful and maintaining cross -strait peace. However, the radical faction of the frequent pressure proposal in China requires countermeasures to counter China to protest its oppression of airlines to change Taiwan's sovereignty;Taiwan is part of China, indicating that Taiwan has not yet independent theory and Taiwan is not a sovereign independent country.
Secondly, Tsai Ing -wen did not properly handle the Andrdquo; "Maintaining the status quo and incorporating the willingness to be included in the party outline and the willingness of the party outline, and when the whole generation of the whole generation was held, the aforementioned proposal was formalized, symbolic totem and" walking over the field Andrdquo;The "referendum Taiwan independence party platform" and "normal state resolution" have denied the existence of the Republic of China. If the DPP will not acknowledge the "one China principle Andrdquo; and" and "92 consensus andrdquo; but in accordance with the aforementioned party outline and resolution.Adopt a referendum to build a country and make the constitutional name to change the country name.
Although the "Taiwan's Future Resolution" acknowledged the "Republic of China Andrdquo;, it claimed that sovereignty and territorial scope was limited to Taiwan. And" Republic of China Andrdquo; already "Taiwan's" Taiwanization Andrdquo;;.Although claiming to defend the value of Taiwan is conducive to constructing the awareness of the main body; it also tears the national identity of Taiwanese society. Andrdquo;"Taiwan Consensus Andrdquo;.
Maintaining the status quo should be entered into the party's platform to obtain the letter of the people
Secondly, Chen Shui -bian admits that the presidential "new intermediate route andrdquo; and" Taiwan's future resolution "recognizes the Republic of China. The resolution has become the subsequent cross -strait policy guidance program.However, he wanted to incorporate the party's outline three times, but he couldn't enter the door.President Tsai Ing -wen and chairman of the party, through the high overlap of the highest party and government positions and the high concentration of power, the consistency of party assistance, unblocked political parties and political policies.
However, the actual operation still shows the diversity of the party's faction, and ultimately decentralized and blurred the government's policy demands.This shows the paradox of the DPP government and the political party politics on cross -strait policies. This paradox may be based on votes to be maximized and strive to support the expansion of the governing foundation.The disadvantaged president and party chairman have insufficient political leadership and decision.
Furthermore, the cross -strait policy goals of the Democratic Progressive Party are swimming away from Andrdquo; between "maintaining the status quo andrdquo; and" Legal Independence andrdquo;The seemingly contradictory goal combination is also a combination of combination strategies. The use of "maintaining the status quo Andrdquo; and recognizing the claims of the Republic of China in accordance with the Constitution, advertising the" middle route Andrdquo; obtain light green and middle voters support; use referendum independence and declaration systemConstitution, Taiwan's names and participation in international organizations, consolidating deep green voters, and avoiding its political identity turned to more radical independent parties.
The DPP holds the middle route to win the sudden government, and is afraid that the bottom line of "Legal Taiwan independence andrdquo; the bottom line, and awarded the excuse of Chinese military exercises for martial arts deterrence, which caused the national security to be obvious and immediately dangerous;The relationship with the alliance with the radical Taiwan independence party, and suddenly moved towards the radical route of Taiwan independence.
Finally, the Democratic Progressive Party's cross -strait relations continue to be marginalized and difficult to obtain the trust of the public.This is equivalent to losing the possibility of expressing goodwill opportunities to the mainland authorities through the amendments to the party outline, the loss of political dialogue between the people, and the people's common relationships fall into a vicious circle, and hostility rises like a spiral.
And "Xi Lianhui andrdquo; a total of four times, Lien Chan proposed Andrdquo; and Chinese leaders also mentioned" the new four Andrdquo; and the national and Communist policy will continue to dominate the development of cross -strait relations;Andrdquo; but subject to the lack of Andrdquo; "1992 consensus andrdquo;" the DPP's role in cross -strait relations is gradually marginalized due to the lack of "1992 consensus andrdquo;Indirectly responded to Andrdquo;
The political stance of the DPP is uncertain, and the cross -strait routes are divergent and conflict in the party's internal factions.As the ruling party, the ruling party cannot advocate both maintaining the status quo, but also advocates the name of independent founding, the name of Taiwan, and normal countries. This dual strategy of the conflict of conflicts will inevitably leadThe authorities adopted an excuse for the "Anti -split State Law", and eventually even the bottom line and "maintainedThe relationship suddenly moved towards the radical route of Taiwan independence.
Finally, the Democratic Progressive Party's cross -strait relations continue to be marginalized and difficult to obtain the trust of the public.This is equivalent to losing the possibility of expressing goodwill opportunities to the mainland authorities through the amendments to the party outline, the loss of political dialogue between the people, and the people's common relationships fall into a vicious circle, and hostility rises like a spiral.
And "Xi Lianhui andrdquo; a total of four times, Lien Chan proposed Andrdquo; and Chinese leaders also mentioned" the new four Andrdquo; and the national and Communist policy will continue to dominate the development of cross -strait relations;Andrdquo; but subject to the lack of Andrdquo; "1992 consensus andrdquo;" the DPP's role in cross -strait relations is gradually marginalized due to the lack of "1992 consensus andrdquo;Indirectly responded to Andrdquo;
The political stance of the DPP is uncertain, and the cross -strait routes are divergent and conflict in the party's internal factions.As the ruling party, the ruling party cannot advocate both maintaining the status quo, but also advocates the name of independent founding, the name of Taiwan, and normal countries. This dual strategy of the conflict of conflicts will inevitably leadThe authorities adopted an excuse for "anti -division national law", and finally even the bottom line of Andrdquo; the goal could not be obtained, let alone the highest line and "legal independent Andrdquo; goal.
The author is an assistant professor at the Department of Public Affairs of Taiwan Foguang University
