Twelve years after direct presidential elections were introduced here, the first-ever presidential debate will be held this afternoon. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
The debate is both historically significant and politically necessary. It opens an arena where no false allegations, finger pointing or war of words can dominate -- one where both candidates can elaborate on their vision and policies in a more rational and practical way.
From now on, voters will be able to insist that a candidate spell out his or her program and vision so they can choose a candidate to fulfill a specific mandate. Issues and messages are more effective than image building in attracting votes. Candidates also need to show their ability to resolve problems by seeing the other side's point of view.
What should be expected from the debate? At least three issues must be addressed: national identity, political institutionalization and a feasible vision for the future of this nation.
An incumbent almost always carries more burdens than his or her challengers. While pursuing plans to hold a referendum and write a new constitution, Chen must persuade voters of the extent to which he can tackle both internal and external pressures. His insistence on independent sovereignty has consolidated the notion of Taiwanese consciousness. How to further deepen democracy without bringing the nation to the brink of crisis is one of his challenges.
For Lien, his life-long embrace of the "one China" principle and his failure to distance himself from Beijing's implicit endorsement have created troubles for the pan-blue camp.
Lien will have to explain how he would protect national security as part of his pledge to immediately open direct links if he is elected. Can he carry out his agenda without accepting Beijing's "one China" precondition? Does he include "independence" as one of the options for future cross-strait relations? Those are questions that cannot be left unanswered.
One of the greatest tasks facing the next president is how to institutionalize the democratic system. Chen has outlined a blueprint for writing a new constitution and institutionalizing clean politics. Such attempts would bypass the lengthy -- and often impractical -- tradition procedures for constitutional reform. The question is to what extent he can ensure that his alternative process will be smooth and peaceful. Chen must also present a defense against the opposition's accusations that his administration is tainted by "black gold."
As a long-time KMT member and official, Lien must come clean about both the party's "black gold" history and his own. He cannot simply try to pass the blame on to former president Lee Teng-hui (
Both Chen and Lien have issued many "electoral checks" -- promises -- to voters. Can all or even some of these checks be cashed and, if so, at what cost? Where are the financial resources to support all the proposed social-welfare projects? How do they propose Taiwan transform itself in the face of globalization and the rise of China's economic and political clout?
The voters deserve fair and workable answers. The future of the nation depends upon it.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS