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
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS