Our presidents used to be elected by the National Assembly based on an earlier version of the Constitution of the Republic of China.
At that time, people didn't need to worry about assessing the qualifications of national leaders if they weren't in the assembly.
And that body was a rubber stamp anyway.
This was because rulers during authoritarian times did not entrust people other than themselves or their sons with the presidency.
Now the people of Taiwan are going to exercise their right to elect a president for the third time.
We should cherish this wonderful opportunity and the responsibility of being masters of the country.
We should also think carefully about the qualities that our national leader should have.
We can draw some answers to this question from what former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) has said over the past two years in reference to a leader's qualities.
He said that a leader should be firm in his convictions, be willing to sacrifice personal interests for the public good, be fearless in the face of a challenge, be rich in charisma, be high in prestige and be capable of getting things done.
He has also used these criteria to variously criticize the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) for put-ting its own interests above those of the country and Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) for his administration's incompetence in flood prevention.
I do not think it is possible for us to set criteria for a perfect leader if we do not consider the nation's political reality and needs.
In other words, people need to have a basic idea about social justice and the direction the country is heading in before deciding which pair of candidates is more suitable for the highest office.
Choosing a leader is about choosing one's direction and values.
It is not about choosing an all-powerful deity to worship to solve all of one's problems.
Taiwan has been ruled by different foreign powers, and events of the past 50 years have not been clearly investigated due to the White Terror and martial law.
The confusion over who this period's victims and oppressors were is detrimental to forming a common identity.
But the democratization and localization that started here in the 1990s are irreversible. Only the one who can continue along this path would be a suitable president.
In recent years, Taiwan has suffered from the crisis of being a country but not acting like one.
This has deepened with the endless incentives and threats offered by China as well as the collaboration with China of local political parties and media outlets.
Beijing has distorted President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) anti-missile referendum in an attempt to convince some that it is a referendum on Taiwan's independence.
Its attempts to make Taiwan cancel the referendum process, together with pressure from the US and Japan, indicate a crisis still looms before us.
If a president is not willing or able to resist such unreasonable, ridiculous pressure, then he does not have the requisite will power to serve the country.
We need a president who can continue democratic reforms and localization.
He needs to be sufficiently strong-willed to resist such pressure and ensure the nation's best interests are protected and dignity preserved.
Chen Yi-shen is an associate research fellow at the Institute of Modern History at the Academia Sinica.
Translated by Jennie Shih
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS