改寫台灣歷史的人 ──李登輝執政十二年

:::

2000 / 6月

文‧李光真


五月二十日新總統就職大典後,長達十二年又四個月的「李登輝時代」正式劃上句點。然而李總統主政期間大開大闔、高潮迭起,至今仍餘波蕩漾;加上新總統陳水扁又被視為「最能延續『李登輝路線』的人」,可以想見,未來李登輝可能退而不休,依舊是新政府所倚重、請益的國之大老。此時回顧李登輝十二年,不在於評論功過,而希望能鑑往知來,認清台灣目前的處境與未來的挑戰。


在新舊政權交接之際,李登輝總統十二年來的執政評價一直是報章上的熱門議題。根據山水民意研究公司在今年五月初所做的調查,發現台灣民眾對李登輝的執政成績,打了差強人意的六十七分。其中以「推動台灣民主改革」得分最高,達七十三分,而以「改革黑金」成績最差,只有四十八分。聯合報於五月間進行的民調,則發現有七成四的民眾對李登輝過去十二年的整體政績感到滿意,對目前表現的滿意度則稍差,約六成一。

「民主先生」與「寧靜革命」

回首民國七十七年一月十三日,強人蔣經國驟逝,時任副總統的李登輝接下重擔。從正面來看,當時的中華民國以中小企業外銷尖兵打先鋒,已成功締造了經濟上的「台灣奇蹟」;旺盛的經濟活力、勤勞而受有良好教育的廣大勞工,以及高科技園區雛形的完成,讓李登輝時代有了一個殷實的基礎。蔣經國晚年開放大陸探親、宣布解嚴、報禁開放,以及默許反對黨成立,也為台灣政治的民主化開了一扇門窗。

然而不可諱言的,當時的中華民國在長期威權統治下,人民的言論、出版、組黨結社、人身保障等自由依然百般受限。意識型態上,由於強調大中國與反共法統,本土文化不彰,台灣主體意識也隱而未顯,政治生態、文化資源的分配不盡公平,許多重要基礎建設也在「心懷大陸」的思維邏輯下進度緩慢,捷運就是一個例子。

今昔對比,許多學者同意,李登輝主政十二年,最大的貢獻,便是完成台灣的民主化,包括國會全面改選、總統直選、政黨政治架構的建立、軍隊的國家化與嚴守中立,以及言論、集會等基本自由,使得人民免於白色恐怖與高壓威權。

民國八十年,「動員戡亂時期臨時條款」廢除,重新回歸憲政。自此,海外流亡的「政治黑名單」一筆勾消、「政治犯」也成為歷史名詞。去年十二月,「人權紀念碑」在綠島矗立;今年總統大選,更締造了中國歷史上罕見的政權和平轉移……,「寧靜革命」的完成,是李登輝最自豪的。

寧靜革命破除了舊時代一黨獨大的威權,成就無可置疑。然而進一步觀察,台灣雖有民主的形式,卻尚未建立良好的法治及公民社會的規範。官員貪腐時有所聞,而民眾的政治素養也嫌不足,黑金共治、司法威信不足、公權力不彰,距離「優質民主」仍有一長段距離。

台灣人站起來了!

民主化之外,李登輝同樣自許極高、但各界評價兩極的,首推「憲政改革」。從七十九年國是會議召開迄今,國民大會在十年內修憲六次,雖然使得中華民國憲法逐漸符合台灣本土的需要,但由於推動總統直選,將原本傾向內閣制的憲政設計轉化為雙首長制,總統的職權膨脹而不易監督,而雙首長制到底該如何運作,迄今已成阿扁政府的燙手難題之一。今年四月國大虛級化之後,「修憲怪獸」固然從此消失,但缺乏國民大會制衡後,立法院一院獨大,會不會又引發哪些怪現象?國人依舊難以放心。

李登輝的「本土化」政策,也是評價兩極化的爭議焦點。在這十二年中,台灣從「中華民國的一省」,逐漸轉變為「中華民國在台灣」,到目前幾乎不聞中華民國國號,三民主義國歌及青天白日國旗也幾乎絕跡,代而起之的,是已成主流價值的「新台灣人」與「台灣優先論」。

用「新台灣人」來凝聚台灣各族群,打造台灣命運共同體;用「台灣優先」來對抗島內殘存的大中國思維及對岸中共的壓力,這對佔台灣人口達七成以上的本省籍民眾,和台灣與大陸實際上已分離百年的政治現實而言,本應是天經地義的事。李登輝在民國八十三年接受日本作家司馬遼太郎訪問時,就清楚說出「國民黨是外來政權」、「生為台灣人的悲哀」等內心深處的感想。

台灣人?中國人?

遺憾的是,李登輝在貫徹「本土化」、「台灣優先」、極力將台灣以主權國家型態推進國際舞台之際,兩岸關係卻漸行漸遠、嫌隙日深。近幾年經濟上力行「戒急用忍」,政治上推出「兩國論」,造成兩岸口水戰不斷,台海和平也蒙上陰影。換句話說,李登輝「本土化」與「去中國化」互為表裡的結果,一方面讓台灣人民有自信、尊嚴,另一方面,也使得統獨議題紛擾不休,台灣民眾的國家認同極端混淆,兩岸關係更是空前緊張。甚至阿扁總統的就職演說中,只因說到「台灣站起來,有了國家的尊嚴……」,就嚇得股市在短短不到一小時一度暴跌四百多點;報章雜誌則針對阿扁總統只說了九次「中華民國」、卻說了四十三次「台灣」大作文章。

在本土化已深化的情況下,為什麼多提幾次台灣就會引起恐慌?這正是「台灣優先論」的盲點所在。而兩岸一方面上層政治關係瀕於破裂,戰爭烏雲籠罩,一方面民間底層的通商、通漁、通婚卻水乳交融,學術、文化、宗教,甚至影視、旅遊也都難分彼此。意識型態排斥、抗拒中國大陸,現實生活卻交流不斷,這樣的矛盾脫節,也讓老百姓無所適從。

期待「後李登輝時代」

回到內政,李登輝主政期間,台灣在民主化、本土化的開放氛圍中,逐步走向多元、國際。其中教育制度的多元化成果相當突出,箝制教育思考方向近半世紀的聯考制度即將廢除,其他婦女、兒童、勞工及環保等社運議題也都曾沸沸揚揚,喧騰一時。多元社會力的解放,曾經是台灣解嚴後的一大盛事,許多人也希望藉此形成公民社會基礎,讓自主性的社運團體成為政府和企業之外的第三勢力。可惜社運活力在曇花一現後漸趨沉寂,使得台灣在多元開放中,缺乏了內省、制衡的聲音。

李登輝愛憎分明的強勢領導風格,也是過去主政期間屢被討論的話題。經過多年來的黨內政爭與清黨後,國民黨內早已分崩離析,連戰與宋楚瑜的「兄弟鬩牆」之爭,直接導致了此次的總統敗選,而國民黨慘敗後力圖振作,卻才發現偌大的百年老店中,浮誇諂迎之輩充斥,夙孚清望的賢達之士卻寥寥可數。專業退守、是非模糊,被認為是李登輝執政最嚴重的後遺症之一。

回首綜觀,弔詭的是,李登輝對台灣的貢獻,也正是招謗之處。他秉著對台灣的大愛,獨力對抗各派保守反對勢力,破除種種成規桎梏,將台灣帶進一個十二年前所不敢想像的新境界。然而舊時代枷鎖不再,新時代卻依然荊棘滿佈,新政府一上台,就得面對包括憲政體制、兩岸關係、黑金充斥、財政赤字、民生及社會福利議題等的許多棘手難題。「李登輝路線」未來有哪些部分將被延續?哪些需要調整甚至轉向?端賴新政府的明智抉擇了。

相關文章

近期文章

EN 日本語

A Pivotal President-- Lee Teng-hui's 12 Years

Laura Li /tr. by Robert Taylor

The inauguration of Chen Shui-bian on 20 May officially drew a line under the 12 years and four months of the "Lee Teng-hui era." But the effects of President Lee's presidency, with all its momentous twists and turns, continue to be felt; and when we consider that President Chen has been seen as "the man most able to continue the 'Lee Teng-hui line,'" the prospect looms large that although "retired," Lee will not be inactive, but will continue in the role of elder statesman and trusted adviser to the new government. Today, we look back on Lee Teng-hui's 12 years in power, not to pass judgement on his successes and failures, but in the hope that an understanding of the past can serve as a guide to the future, by which we can more clearly understand Taiwan's present situation and future challenges.


With Lee Teng-hui's 12-year presidency coming to an end, the press has been busy appraising Lee's performance. A poll in early May by the Shanshui opinion research company found that the public gave Lee Teng-hui a reasonably good overall mark of 67 out of 100 for his achievements in office. The highest individual mark, 73, was for "promoting democratic reform in Taiwan," while the lowest, 48, was for "combating criminality and corruption in politics." Another survey, conducted in May by the United Daily News, found that 74% of those polled were satisfied overall with Lee's achievements during his 12-year tenure as a whole, but somewhat less-61%-were happy with his more recent performance.

"Mr. Democracy"

On 13 January 1988, the strongman Chiang Ching-kuo died and Lee Teng-hui stepped in to take his place. Taiwan at that time was in the midst of an "economic miracle" fueled by the export success of its small and medium enterprises. The strong economy, a hardworking and well educated workforce, and encouraging initial progress at the Hsinchu Science-Based Industrial Park, provided a solid foundation for the Lee Teng-hui era to build on. In his last years Chiang Ching-kuo, by allowing family visits to mainland China, lifting martial law, ending the ban on new media organizations, and permitting the formation of opposition parties, had also opened the door to the democratization of Taiwanese politics.

After many years of authoritarian rule, however, there were still many restrictions on free speech, publishing, the formation of political parties and civic organizations, and freedom of the individual. In terms of ideology, the stress on the ideal of a unified Greater China and institutionalized anti-communism threw a pall over local culture, and a Taiwan-oriented consciousness had not yet openly emerged. The political environment and the distribution of cultural resources were less than fair, and due to the influence of a world-view centered on the Chinese mainland, progress on urban rapid transit systems and many other important basic infrastructure projects was slow.

Many scholars agree that in his 12 years at the helm, Lee's greatest contribution has been the democratization of Taiwan. His achievements include pushing through full elections to the legislature, introducing the direct popular election of the president, building a framework for multi-party politics, bringing the armed forces under the control of the state rather than the KMT and requiring them to maintain strict political neutrality, and guaranteeing basic freedoms such as freedom of speech and of association. These changes have freed the people from "white terror" and blatant authoritarianism.

In 1991, the Temporary Provisions Effective During the Period of National Mobilization for Suppression of the Communist Rebellion were abolished, thus restoring constitutional government, and this paved the way for scrapping of the blacklist (which prevented political exiles returning to Taiwan) and release of the ROC's last political prisoner. The Human Rights Monument was erected on Green Island last December, and this year's presidential elections brought about a peaceful transfer of political power between political parties, something never before seen in Chinese history. The completion of the "quiet revolution" is Lee Teng-hui's proudest achievement.

The merit of the quiet revolution's achievement in breaking the previous one-party monopoly on power is beyond doubt. Looking more closely, however, although Taiwan has achieved the outward form of democracy, it still does not present a good model of the rule of law and a strong civil society. Corruption in official places is frequently in the news, and the public at large appear insufficiently versed in the ways of democratic politics. The entrenchment of organized crime and big money in the political fabric, the inadequate prestige of the judiciary, and a lack of ability to impose public authority, all go to show that we are still a long way from being a "high-quality democracy."

The people of Taiwan have stood up!

Apart from democratization, another area in which Lee Teng-hui rates his own achievements very highly, but on which other commentators' judgements are mixed, is that of constitutional reform. In the decade following the 1990 National Affairs Conference, the National Assembly revised the constitution six times, gradually bringing the ROC constitution more into line with Taiwan's local needs, but by introducing direct presidential elections he also changed what had been more or less a cabinet system to one of dual leadership by both the president and premier. The powers of the president have been expanded without a commensurate increase in the powers of supervision by other branches of government, and just how such a dual-leadership system is supposed to operate remains a delicate issue for Chen Shui-bian's new government. The sidelining of the National Assembly in April of this year removed that body's ability to act as an uncontrolled "constitution-amending monster." But will the loss of the assembly as a counterweight to the power of the Legislative Yuan also give rise to new anomalies? Citizens have continued cause for concern.

Lee Teng-hui's "indigenization" policy is another controversial issue. In the past 12 years, Taiwan has gradually turned from being "a province of the Republic of China," to being "the Republic of China on Taiwan," and then to the present situation where one hardly ever hears the name "Republic of China." The national anthem, which refers to Sun Yat-sen's Three Principles of the People, and the national flag, with its white sun set in a blue sky-the symbol of the KMT-have almost disappeared. Instead, concepts such as "new Taiwanese" and "Taiwan first" have become mainstream values.

The idea of a "new Taiwanese" identity was put forward as a rallying call for all Taiwan's different ethnic groups, as common stakeholders in Taiwan's future. "Taiwan first" is a counter both to the remnants of the "Greater China" mentality within Taiwan, and to the pressure from the communist regime across the Straits. Both concepts should in fact be seen as entirely natural, for over 70% of Taiwan's population is of long-established Taiwanese ancestry, and the island has not been ruled from the mainland for more than a century. In an interview with Japanese writer Shiba Ryotaro in 1994, Lee Teng-hui clearly expressed his feeling that "the Kuomintang is an alien political force," and of "the tragedy of being born Taiwanese."

Taiwanese, or Chinese?

Regrettably, however, while Lee Teng-hui was implementing "indigenization," putting "Taiwan first," and energetically promoting Taiwan as a sovereign state on the international stage, relations across the Taiwan Strait became increasingly estranged and suspicion-ridden. In recent years, the policy of "no haste, be patient" regarding Taiwan's economic involvement in the mainland, and the description of political contacts as "state-to-state" relations, have embroiled Taiwan in constant wars of words with Beijing, and cast a shadow over regional peace. In other words, the results of Lee Teng-hui's "excision of China"-presented as "indigeniza-tion"-has on the one hand resulted in the people of Taiwan acquiring self-confidence and dignity, but on the other has also led to the contentious issue of reunification versus independence being constantly raised, the sense of national identity of the general public in Taiwan becoming very confused, and cross-strait tensions reaching an all-time high. So much so that the Taipei stock market plummeted by over 400 points in less than an hour just because near the beginning of his inaugural address President Chen said: "Taiwan stands up, representing the. . . dignity of the country." Newspapers also made much of the fact that in his address, Chen mentioned "the Republic of China" only five times, but "Taiwan" 43 times.

With the process of indigenization having already progressed so far, why would mentioning Taiwan a few times provoke such panic? This is precisely the point where the "Taiwan first" concept breaks down. Relations with the mainland at the highest political level have reached impasse after impasse, and dark war clouds gather over the Taiwan Strait; yet at the grassroots level, what with trade links, fishing links and intermarriage, the people are inseparably intermingled, and the same is true on the academic, cultural and religious fronts and even in the entertainment and travel industries. Ideologically, Taiwan rejects and resists mainland China, but in real life there is constant contact. This contradictory dislocation also leaves ordinary people at a loss.

Taiwanese, or Chinese?

Regrettably, however, while Lee Teng-hui was implementing "indigenization," putting "Taiwan first," and energetically promoting Taiwan as a sovereign state on the international stage, relations across the Taiwan Strait became increasingly estranged and suspicion-ridden. In recent years, the policy of "no haste, be patient" regarding Taiwan's economic involvement in the mainland, and the description of political contacts as "state-to-state" relations, have embroiled Taiwan in constant wars of words with Beijing, and cast a shadow over regional peace. In other words, the results of Lee Teng-hui's "excision of China"-presented as "indigeniza-tion"-has on the one hand resulted in the people of Taiwan acquiring self-confidence and dignity, but on the other has also led to the contentious issue of reunification versus independence being constantly raised, the sense of national identity of the general public in Taiwan becoming very confused, and cross-strait tensions reaching an all-time high. So much so that the Taipei stock market plummeted by over 400 points in less than an hour just because near the beginning of his inaugural address President Chen said: "Taiwan stands up, representing the. . . dignity of the country." Newspapers also made much of the fact that in his address, Chen mentioned "the Republic of China" only five times, but "Taiwan" 43 times.

With the process of indigenization having already progressed so far, why would mentioning Taiwan a few times provoke such panic? This is precisely the point where the "Taiwan first" concept breaks down. Relations with the mainland at the highest political level have reached impasse after impasse, and dark war clouds gather over the Taiwan Strait; yet at the grassroots level, what with trade links, fishing links and intermarriage, the people are inseparably intermingled, and the same is true on the academic, cultural and religious fronts and even in the entertainment and travel industries. Ideologically, Taiwan rejects and resists mainland China, but in real life there is constant contact. This contradictory dislocation also leaves ordinary people at a loss.

Into the "post-Lee era"

To return to domestic politics, in the open atmosphere of democratization and indigenization under Lee, Taiwan has become increasingly pluralistic and international in outlook. In particular, there have been salient achievements in the pluralization of education. The joint college entrance exam system, which has dominated educational thinking for nearly half a century, is about to be abolished, and other topics such as women's rights, children's issues, workers' rights and environmental protection have all come to the fore as campaign issues at one time or another. The liberation of the diverse forces within Taiwanese society since the lifting of martial law has been a revelation, and many people have hoped this would lay the foundations of a flourishing civil society and allow autonomous civic campaign groups to become a third force in addition to government and business. Sadly, however, the vitality of these various campaigns was short-lived, so that despite its pluralism and openness, Taiwan lacks voices of introspection and balance.

Lee Teng-hui's domineering leadership style, in which he made no bones about his likes and dislikes, was also a topic much discussed while he was in office. After many years of factional disputes and party purges within the Kuomintang, the party is riven by long-standing internal divisions, and the fratricidal struggle between Lien Chan and James Soong was the direct cause of its defeat in the latest presidential election. In its efforts to revive itself after this crushing reversal, the hundred-year old party has only now discovered that there is no shortage of hypocritical sycophants within its ranks, but precious few worthy and able people of good repute. The flight of specialist talent, and a failure to take a clear moral stance, have been seen as some of the most serious failings of Lee Teng-hui's governance.

Looking back overall, what is paradoxical is that Lee's greatest contributions to Taiwan are also the areas which have attracted the harshest criticism. Inspired by his great love of Taiwan, he stood alone against the power of the conservative factions which opposed him, swept away various entrenched practices, and brought Taiwan into a new world which one would not have dared to imagine 12 years ago. Nevertheless, although the shackles of the old era are gone, Taiwan in the new era is still beset with difficulties, and on coming to office the new government will immediately have to grapple with many difficult issues, including the constitutional system, cross-strait relations, rampant criminality and corruption in politics and government, a burgeoning budget deficit, the state of the economy, and social welfare programs. Which parts of the "Lee Teng-hui line" will be continued in the future? Which need to be adjusted or even reversed? We look to the new government to make wise choices.

Into the "post-Lee era"

To return to domestic politics, in the open atmosphere of democratization and indigenization under Lee, Taiwan has become increasingly pluralistic and international in outlook. In particular, there have been salient achievements in the pluralization of education. The joint college entrance exam system, which has dominated educational thinking for nearly half a century, is about to be abolished, and other topics such as women's rights, children's issues, workers' rights and environmental protection have all come to the fore as campaign issues at one time or another. The liberation of the diverse forces within Taiwanese society since the lifting of martial law has been a revelation, and many people have hoped this would lay the foundations of a flourishing civil society and allow autonomous civic campaign groups to become a third force in addition to government and business. Sadly, however, the vitality of these various campaigns was short-lived, so that despite its pluralism and openness, Taiwan lacks voices of introspection and balance.

Lee Teng-hui's domineering leadership style, in which he made no bones about his likes and dislikes, was also a topic much discussed while he was in office. After many years of factional disputes and party purges within the Kuomintang, the party is riven by long-standing internal divisions, and the fratricidal struggle between Lien Chan and James Soong was the direct cause of its defeat in the latest presidential election. In its efforts to revive itself after this crushing reversal, the hundred-year old party has only now discovered that there is no shortage of hypocritical sycophants within its ranks, but precious few worthy and able people of good repute. The flight of specialist talent, and a failure to take a clear moral stance, have been seen as some of the most serious failings of Lee Teng-hui's governance.

Looking back overall, what is paradoxical is that Lee's greatest contributions to Taiwan are also the areas which have attracted the harshest criticism. Inspired by his great love of Taiwan, he stood alone against the power of the conservative factions which opposed him, swept away various entrenched practices, and brought Taiwan into a new world which one would not have dared to imagine 12 years ago. Nevertheless, although the shackles of the old era are gone, Taiwan in the new era is still beset with difficulties, and on coming to office the new government will immediately have to grapple with many difficult issues, including the constitutional system, cross-strait relations, rampant criminality and corruption in politics and government, a burgeoning budget deficit, the state of the economy, and social welfare programs. Which parts of the "Lee Teng-hui line" will be continued in the future? Which need to be adjusted or even reversed? We look to the new government to make wise choices.

台湾の歴史を書き換えた ──李登輝総統の12年

5月20日、新総統の就任式典が行なわれ、12年4ヶ月にわたった「李登輝時代」が正式に幕を閉じた。李登輝氏が総統を務めてきた間、さまざまな変化や起伏があり、その余波は今も続いている。また新総統となった陳水扁氏は「『李登輝路線』を最も継続し得る存在」と見られており、ここからも、今後李登輝氏は第一線を退いても休むことはなく、依然として新政府から重んじられ、教えを請われる国の大老となることがうかがえる。本誌がここで、李登輝総統の12年間を振り返るのは、その功罪を論ずるためではなく、来し方を振り返って将来の参考とし、台湾が現在置かれている現状と、今後の課題を明らかにしていくためである。


新旧の政権交代に当り、李登輝氏の総統としての12年間をどう評価するかがマスコミで大いに議論された。山水民意研究公司が今年5月に行なった世論調査によると、台湾の人々の李登輝氏に対する評価は、おおむね満足できる67点であった。中でも「台湾の民主改革を推進した」という項目で最高得点の73点を取っており、一方「黒金(暴力組織と金権)の改革」という項目での得点が最も低く、48点にとどまった。有力紙、聯合報が同じく5月に行なった世論調査によると、74パーセントの国民が、李登輝氏の12年間を通しての功績に満足しているが、李登輝氏の最近の言行に満足している人はやや少なく、61パーセントにとどまっている。

1988年1月13日、ストロングマンだった蒋経国氏が突然逝去し、当時副総統を務めていた李登輝氏が総統の重責を担うことになった。当時の中華民国の状況は、良い面を見ると、中小企業の輸出が急速に伸び、すでに台湾経済の奇蹟が実現していた。当時の台湾は経済的活力が旺盛で、良好な教育を受けた勤勉な労働力が豊富にあり、ハイテク技術を集めたサイエンス・パークの雛形も完成していた。これらの条件が、李登輝時代における豊富な基礎となった。また蒋経国総統は晩年、中国大陸への里帰りを自由化し、戒厳令の解除を宣言し、新聞発行を自由化し、さらに野党の結成を黙認しており、政治的な民主化への扉はすでに開かれていた。

しかし、当時の中華民国は長期にわたる権威統治の下で、人々の言論の自由、出版の自由、結社の自由などは保障されておらず、また人身の安全も十分には保障されていなかった。イデオロギーの面では、大中国思想と反共が強調され、台湾文化は重んじられず、台湾としての主体意識もまだ明らかではなかった。さらに、政治面や文化面における資源の分配は不公平で、台湾の基礎建設においても「心に大陸を思う」という考えから、なかなか進展していなかった。都市部の新交通システムの建設の遅れも、そうした例の一つである。

しかし今日はそうではない。多くの学者が均しく認めるのは、李登輝総統の12年間の最大の貢献は、台湾の民主化を達成したという点だ。国会の全面改選が行なわれ、総統が直接選挙で選ばれるようになり、政党政治の構造が確立し、軍隊は国家のもとのなって中立を厳守するようになり、また言論や集会の自由などの基本的人権が保障されるようになった。人々は政治的弾圧や高圧的な権威政治から抜け出すことができたのである。

1991年「動員乱時期臨時条項」が廃止され、中華民国は再び憲政体制に戻った。それ以来、海外に逃れていた人々の「政治ブラックリスト」は全面的に廃止され、「政治犯」という言葉も過去のものとなった。昨年12月には、緑島に「人権記念碑」が建てられ、今年の総統選挙では、ついに中国の歴史上希有な政権の平和的移行が実現した。これら「静かな革命」の実現こそ、李登輝氏が最も誇りとする功績である。

静かな革命が、旧時代の一党支配の権威体制を打ち破ったという功績は疑うべくもない。しかし、さらに進んで見ていくと、台湾は民主政治の形式は備えたものの、まだ良好な法治制度と市民社会の規範は確立していない。官僚の腐敗はよく耳にするし、国民の政治的素養も十分ではない。さらに黒金が横行し、司法の威信も十分ではなく、公権力も十分に機能していない。「質的に優れた民主主義」までには、まだ大きな距離があると言えるだろう。

こうした民主化の他に、李登輝氏が自らの功績として誇りとしているが、一方、各界からの評価が両極端に分かれるのは「憲政改革」である。90年に「国是会議」が開かれてから今日までの10年間に、国民大会は6度にわたって憲法を改正してきた。これらの改正によって、中華民国憲法はしだいに台湾本土の需要にかなうようになってきたが、総統の直接選挙制度を推進したことによって、それまでは内閣制に近かった憲政体制が、二首長制(総統と行政院長の二首長)へと変り、総統の権能が大きく拡大され、それを監督する機能が減少したのである。この二首長制をどのように運営していくかは、今の陳水扁政府にとっても非常に難しい課題の一つとなっている。憲法改正を続けてきた国民大会は、今年4月に非常設化され、この「憲法改正の怪獣」は消失した。しかし、議会の一方である国民大会による均衡の機能が失われ、今後の議会は立法院のみとなるため、これがさらに混乱を生じる引き金とならないかどうか、国民は不安を抱いている。

李登輝氏の「台湾化」政策も、評価が両極端に分かれる争点だ。この12年の間に、台湾は「中華民国の一省」から、しだいに「台湾の中華民国」へと変り、中華民国の国号や、三民主義の国歌、青天白日旗なども、ほとんど見られなくなった。これに代って新しい主流の価値観となったのが「新台湾人」や「台湾優先論」である。

「新台湾人」という概念は、台湾の各民族や出身地を異にする人々を一体化させ、台湾の運命共同体を形成するもので、また「台湾優先」は、台湾島内に残る大中国思想と対岸の中共の圧力に対抗するためのものだ。これは、台湾の人口の7割以上を占める本省籍の人々にとっては当たり前のことであり、また台湾と大陸が実質的には100年にわたって分離してきたという政治的現実から見れば、もともと当然のことである。李登輝氏は94年に日本の作家、司馬遼太郎氏のインタビューを受けた際、「国民党は外来政権である」「台湾人に生れた悲哀」など、心の奥底にある気持ちを語った。

しかし残念なことに、李登輝氏が「台湾化」と「台湾優先」を徹底させ、主権国家として台湾が国際舞台へ出て行こうと努力すればするほど、海峡両岸の溝はしだいに深まって行った。近年は、経済面で「戒急用忍」として対大陸投資抑制策を強力に実施し、政治的には「二国論」を打ち出したが、これによって両岸間では論争が絶えず、台湾海峡の平和に暗い影を落としてきた。言い換えれば、李登輝氏の「台湾化」は「非中国化」と表裏一体をなすもので、一方では台湾人民の自信と尊厳を高めたが、一方では統一か独立かの論争が絶えず、台湾人民の国家アイデンティティも混乱し、両岸関係はこれまでにないほど緊張を増したのである。さらには、今回の総統就任演説において、陳水扁総統が「台湾は立ち上がった…このことは国家の尊厳を表し…」と語ったとたん、台湾の株価は急激に400ポイントも下落し、マスコミは、陳総統が就任演説で「中華民国」と言ったのは9回のみ、「台湾」は43回も言ったなどと大々的に報じた。

すでに台湾化が深く進んでいる中で、なぜ「台湾」という言葉を少し多く使っただけでパニックが起るのだろうか。これこそが「台湾優先論」の盲点である。両岸は政治的には決裂し、戦争の危機さえ迫っているが、一方の民間では、両岸間の通商、漁業、結婚などが盛んで、学術、文化、宗教、さらには映画、旅行などの交流もすでに分ち難いところまで発展している。イデオロギー的には中国大陸を排斥し、拒んでいても、現実の生活における交流は絶えず続いているため、このような矛盾に対して、一般の人々も何に従うべきか、判断に困っているのである。

内政面を見ると、李登輝時代、台湾の民主化と本土化という開放的な雰囲気があり、しだいに社会の多元化と国際化が進んできた。中でも教育制度の多様化の成果は顕著で、半世紀近くにわたって教育の思考方法に深い影響を及ぼしてきた統一入試が近々廃止されることになった。また女性、児童、労働者、環境保護などの社会運動のテーマも盛んに議論されるようになった。多元社会の実現は、戒厳令が解除された後の大きな出来事で、かつて多くの人が、これによって市民社会の基礎が築かれ、自主的な社会運動団体が、政府と企業に続く第三の勢力となることを願っていた。しかし、社会運動は一時的に盛り上がった後、しだいに勢いを失っていき、その後の台湾では、反省や均衡を求める声がしだいに聞かれなくなった。

李登輝氏の愛憎の明確な、強い指導スタイルも、これまでたびたび議論の的となった。長年にわたる党内政争と党内粛清により、国民党内部はすでにばらばらに分裂し、連戦氏と宋楚瑜氏の「兄弟の争い」が今回の総統選挙での敗戦に直接つながった。そして惨敗した国民党が立ち直ろうとしている今、この百年の老舗には、上におもねりへつらう者があふれ、才知と徳のある者がわずかしかいないことが明らかになった。専門性が軽視され、是非が曖昧な状態は、李登輝氏の執政が残した最も深刻な後遺症の一つと言えるだろう。

振り返ると、李登輝氏の台湾への貢献こそ、批判される点でもあるという皮肉に気付かされる。李登輝氏は台湾への大いなる愛をもって、一人で各派の保守反対勢力と対抗し、過去から続くさまざまな束縛を打破し、台湾を12年前には想像もできなかった新たな境地へと前進させた。しかし、旧時代の足枷はなくなったものの、新時代もいばらの道が続いている。新政府は発足直後から、憲政体制、黒金、財政赤字、民生問題、社会福祉など数多くの困難な課題に直面しなければならないのである。今後「李登輝路線」の、どの部分が引き継がれ、どの部分を調整しなければならないのだろか。今後は新政府の知恵と判断を見守っていかなければならない。

X 使用【台灣光華雜誌】APP!
更快速更方便!