As MAC Chairwoman Tsai Inwen’s successful emergency visit to Washington, the US government has expressed that it took “one country on each side” talk at its face value. It may be true as Chairwoman Tsai said that the relation between two countries (US and Taiwan) remained the same. What seems needing further ferreted out, however, is the impact of “one country on each side” talk on Taiwan’s domestic politics, economy and even security after the stabilization of US-Taiwan relations.

Judging from the records of President Chen’s ruling stlye for the past two years, one of the most important guidelines of broaching policies is “to maximize the votes,” meaning that most of his efforts have been made for re-election in 2004. To implement this highest guideline, Chen has to catch voters from the left (pro-independence) to middle (pro-status quo) on the spectrum of independence-unification, and to squeeze the pan-blue (KMT and PFP) parties to the right (pro-unification) corner.

As the majority of voters are pro-status quo voters, Chen proposed “five nos” in his inauguration speech and “integration theory” in a New Year speech in order to win their support. Unfortunately, these remarks are driving pro-independence voters away and Chen’s approval rate among middle voters is dropping mainly because of the worsening economic situation. Obviously, as the 2004 election is approaching, Chen feels the urgency to find another way out.

Chen’s “one country on each side” remark can be viewed as an attempt to re-interpret the “status quo” that, hopefully, satisfies voters from the left to the middle on that spectrum. World Taiwanese Association audiences, as well as other pro-independence voters, were galvanized into gamboling by Chen’s remark. Former president Lee Tenghui also publicly showed his support. The pro-independent voters are without doubt coming back to Chen’s arms again. Recent polls also show that from 41% to 64% of the people investigated agree “one country on each side” is a way to depict the status quo. Chen has win the power of paraphrasing the status quo, and obviously he has put the status quo one step further from “one China with different interpretations” to “one country on each side” with the support of voters from left to middle. Whether Chen has strategies of promoting Taiwan independence or of keeping status quo is not clear, but it is clear that he has launched the first successful step of being re-elected by manipulating the strategy of pleasing pro-independence and pro-status quo voters.

What I personally concern is that making Mainland China policy out of internal (or even personal) considerations might come up with external effects. First of all, Beijing will take advantage of this event to bargain with Washington. The most likely result is that Washington would turn to tilt to Beijing in the Washington-Beijing-Taipei triangle, as what had happened when then-president Lee Tenghui proposed “special state to state relations.” Secondly, Chen’s remarks would embarrass our friends in Capitol Hill and Bush administration. It will become more difficult for Taiwan to advance its own way in the rapidly changing international political and economic arena. The last, but not the least, Beijing has, for the first time, criticized Chen by name for promoting Taiwan Independence. Hawk and pigeon factions in Beijing are both faced with great pressure at the critical moment of turnover of power before the 16^th National congress, and hence, will probably be forced to vie with each other by hard-line policies toward Taiwan. This could mean some sort of military actions if not war. Chen’s government had better engross in watching this development, or both Taiwan economy and security will be in great danger.

（本評論代表作者個人之意見）