时论广场》台湾年终的取暖讨拍外交（方恩格Ross Darrell Feingold）

美国多名联邦参众议员，日前搭专机访台。图为去年美国卫生部长访台后返美所搭乘的行政专机。（本报资料照片）

笔者之前曾发表过，台湾政府在台湾被排除于国际论坛或其他国际间会议的情况下，便开始自组场外取暖大会。我们可以从最近的新闻发现，台湾政府似乎很喜欢进行这种向国际社会讨拍的路数。

例如中国官媒大力批评反对温哥华和高雄建立「友谊城市（Friendship City）」国际间对于这些市与市的关系是有正式定义的，但我时常看到有人会将两者混为一谈。顾名思义，姊妹通常比朋友来得更亲密、更正式。也就是说「姊妹市（a sister city）」相较于「友谊城市」而言是更官方、更紧密的关系。

在台湾许多市府网站上可以看到他们所缔结姊妹市与友谊城市的列表：台北列出了将近50个城市、台中近40、高雄近30。相较之下，比台湾城市规模大上好几倍的东京市政府在其网站上却只列出了12个相关城市。

跟中央的路线相仿，台湾的地方政府似乎也积极采取暖路线，想以城市外交的方式缔结好朋友城市数量，来增添「数大即是美」的门面。高雄甚至还特地替这些好朋友城市做了精美的类观光网站专页，对于市府而言，能够借此跃上国际新闻版面（通常是当地的地方新闻）也算是美事一桩，毕竟这些报导比起市政内容的讨论更为吸睛。但难道没有民众好奇，市府与外国城市签订一个又一个的市政外交关系，究竟对于我们市民的生活有什么实质帮助或改善？

城市之间定期交流固然是件美事，例如在疫情期间，可以交换防疫政策等资讯进而推动当地的防疫措施。但在台湾通常我们看到市府官员「出国考察」之后、公开发表与当地官员微笑握手的照片之外，很少看到他们对于该地市政政策做出什么仿效或检讨的发表。以陈菊在高雄市长任期的最后几天为例，她在2018年3月以考察都市建设与绿建筑为名，率团访问美国纽约市、费城和华府，这3个城市不但非高雄市政府网站上所列出的姊妹、友谊城市，她回国后没几天，更是接任了总统府秘书长一职离开了高雄。

台湾政治的特殊属性很容易让市政外交等政策成为党派之争的手腕。如2019 年时任民进党立委的余宛如在推特上支持布拉格市长取消与北京友好城市关系的决定，还加上「与其考虑与对北京友好的台北市结交友谊，或许可以考虑（台湾的）其他城市」，这在外国政府眼里会觉得很不解，台湾人的砲口对内不对外，只会造成内伤。

高雄市极力争取将温哥华成为友谊城市名单上的一员，以新闻性而言或许可以让他们得到一支记功，但事实上温哥华和高雄早已建立了许多交流往来。例如在温哥华已经有一年一度的台湾电影节、以及30多年传统的温哥华台湾文化节（TaiwanFEST），就算缔交正式的友谊城市关系，也只是画蛇添足。对于市府的公众事务以及中央层级的外交状况而言，也难以达到任何实质帮助。

另一个台湾特有的外交现象，则是在被国际会议排除的情况下，台湾时常在国际会议会场旁自己另外进行小型的边角会议，也就是俗称的场边外交。最近台湾被排除在罗马所举办的G20会议，就是一个很好的例子。在外交部长吴钊燮的访欧行程中，不知为何他原本获邀参加在罗马举办的「对华政策跨国议会联盟」行程临时取消。同个时间点他转而出席公开讲演、会见了几个国家的议员，并且在欧盟总部所在地布鲁塞尔低调会晤了欧盟官员。

而最近刚在格拉斯哥举办的「2021年联合国气候变迁大会（COP 26）」也是另一个台湾进行场边外交的例子。与年度世界卫生大会相仿，台湾政府在场边安排了一个单独的会面场所，以便于与其他国家的代表团接触交流。在场播放的蔡英文总统录制的致词影片中，她提到了台湾优秀的气候变化因应政策。很遗憾这次我们没能见到台湾与英国一起合作促成台湾部长亲自出访的机会，相异于卫福部长陈时中亲自出席世界卫生大会场边并会晤了他国的部长级官员，这次台湾环保署长张子敬并未能亲自出席COP 26的台湾日活动。

上周的台日交流峰会，也可以算是台湾向日本取暖讨拍成功。虽然会上发表了「神户宣言」，呼吁支持台湾参与更多国际间多边组织，但与会者多来自地方政府，而非日本中央政府或国会。对于台湾的国际地位究竟能达成什么新的进展也令人质疑。

在拜登总统和习近平主席举行虚拟峰会的几天前，台湾则祭出一个安慰奖：美国国会议员访问台北。他们短短两晚的访问期间极少有公开的行程，很难想像如此低调的安排对于提高台湾在国际的能见度以及国际参与度能起什么作用。而同时间由一些美国国会议员所提出的《台湾吓阻法（Taiwan Deterrence Act）》草案，意图增进台美军事交流、并提供台湾适度军事融资协助，也可以说是对于台湾国防与外交的给糖吃行为。

台湾这样定期进行场边取暖的方式来呼求国际社会同情的外交方式已渐渐成为常态。然而打悲情牌真的对于建立台湾的国际地位有帮助吗？笔者认为台湾需要向国际社会展现自己对于经济与国家安全的决心、跳脱悲情的角色，才能获得更令人尊敬与钦佩的地位。希望有朝一日台湾人能挺直腰杆、有骨气地对台湾抱持着怜悯与同情的他国说：「Thank you, but no thank you.（谢谢你的同情，但我们不需要。）」（作者为美国共和党海外部亚太区前主席）

原文：

Pity Party Diplomacy to Close Out 2021

By Ross Darrell Feingold

Former Asia Chairman, Republicans Abroad

Twitter: @RossFeingold

This author has previously publicly commented about the Taiwan government’s tendency to organize or participate in “pity party” events when Taiwan is excluded from international forums or other similar events. Sadly, Taiwan continues this habit, with multiple recent examples.

Recently in the news is China’s government and media criticism of, and opposition to, the possibility that Vancouver and Kaohsiung might enter into a friendship city relationship (most people who are not in municipal government are unfamiliar with the distinction between a sister city relationship and a friendship city relationship though the organization Sister Cities International states on its website that relationships between friendship cities are less formal than relationships between sister cities).

Some Taiwan municipalities have friendship and sister city relationships that already number in the dozens: Taipei has nearly fifty, Taichung nearly forty, and Kaohsiung nearly thirty. By comparison, the Tokyo Municipal government lists only twelve such relationships on its website.

Similar to Taiwan’s central government pity party diplomacy, it appears that some municipalities engage in pity party municipal diplomacy in which municipalities add sister or friendship city relationships to achieve quantity over quality. It defies belief that Taiwan’s municipal governments can actively maintain so many relationships. Residents know that often the establishment of these relationships is more about a press release to announce the new relationship, than it is about providing any substantive improvement to the delivery of municipal services.

Certainly, periodic information sharing online (such as during the pandemic) might be productive. In person visits might be productive too if there are substantive outcomes for Taiwan’s municipal governments, though the perception is often that in person travel by Taiwan’s municipal leaders to other countries for “inspection” is more for holiday or their personal image than it is to provide benefit to residents. A prominent example occurred in March 2018, when then-Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu led a delegation to visit New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington DC, just days before she resigned to become the Presidential Office Secretary General. None of the three cities she visited are among the fifteen US cities that Kaohsiung City Government lists on its website as sister or friendship cities.

Often the nature of Taiwan’s politics makes even municipal diplomacy a partisan issue. In 2019, a Democratic Progressive Party legislator at the time, Karen Yu (余宛如), tweeted in support of the Prague mayor’s decision to cancel sister-city relations with Beijing, but added that “instead of establishing sister-city ties with now pro-Beijing Taipei, other cities or counties might be better”.

The reality is that Vancouver and Kaohsiung already have strong ties, whether people-to-people or through events such as Vancouver’s annual TaiwanFEST, a large event that is over thirty years old. One additional friendship city relationship for Kaohsiung or any other Taiwan municipality might look nice on paper, but ultimately is an insufficient substitute for public and substantive action by foreign governments to expand relations with Taiwan’s central government.

Another recent pity party example is what occurred when Taiwan was excluded from the G20 meeting in Rome. Foreign Minister Joseph Wu simultaneously travelled to Europe which included public speeches and meetings with parliamentarians in several countries, and a low profile meeting in the European Union capital of Brussels, but for reasons unknown the plan for him to attend the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China meeting in Rome did not come to fruition.

The recent COP 26 meeting in Glasgow was also another example of Taiwan’s pity party diplomacy. Similar to the annual World Health Assembly, Taiwan arranged a separate venue for its officials to engage with delegations from other countries, including a video address by President Tsai Ing-wen in which she discussed Taiwan’s admirable climate change policies. Unlike the World Health Assembly where in recent years Taiwan’s Health and Welfare Minister Chen Shih-chung attended in person and met with ministerial level officials from other countries, Taiwan’s Environmental Protection Administration Minister Chang Tzi-chin did not attend the COP 26 Taiwan Day in person. It is unfortunate that Taiwan and the United Kingdom did not facilitate an in-person visit by a Taiwan minister.

The recent Japan - Taiwan Exchange Summit might also be included within pity party diplomacy. Although summit participants issued the “Kobe Declaration” calling for more participation for Taiwan in multilateral organizations, participants for the most part came from local governments rather than Japan’s central government or the Diet. Taiwan also recently had the consolation prize of US Congressmen visiting Taipei days before President Joe Biden and President Xi Jinping held a virtual summit, though the two night visit and secretive itinerary that lacked public events did little to improve Taiwan’s current international participation even if the visitors intend to help Taiwan in other ways in the future. The Taiwan Deterrence Act proposed by US Congressmen to provide financing to Taiwan so that Taiwan can purchase weapons is also a form of diplomatic and security pity for Taiwan.

Taiwan’s periodic willingness to engage in pity party diplomacy or to accept the international community’s pity risks the international community accepting it as the norm. However, seeking or accepting the international community’s pity is not a good substitute for demonstrating to the international community that Taiwan’s government and people are determined to do what is necessary to ensure Taiwan’s economic and national security. Sometimes, Taiwan can demonstrate this determination by informing its overseas friends “Thank you, but no thank you”.