Chen deserves to win
I refer to the article "Foreign journalists to flock to Taiwan" (Friday, March 5, page 4).
It is no surprise that foreign journalists and news organizations are keen to report on the presidential election. Beyond the historic referendum to be carried out on March 20, the fact is that the choice of Taiwanese voters on that day will have a huge impact on the world in general.
It is no exaggeration to state that after the events which occurred in the past four years, a victory for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Five key factors point to a win by President Chen Shui-bian (
Unlike Lien, Chen grew up with a humble background, and that certainly speaks of his ability to empathize with the less fortunate in society. Lien and Soong have been embroiled in financial scandals, which have yet to be resolved. Also, at the age of 68, is Lien able to relate to the feelings and aspirations of the younger, modern Taiwanese? Chen is only 53. Lien has also frequently modified his views and actions over the past few years. From supporting the view of "special state-to-state relations between Taiwan and China," as espoused by his former party chairman Lee in 1999, Lien has now indicated that he would prefer a peaceful reunification of the two countries. The Chen-Lu partnership has worked considerably well for the past four years, and will a Lien-Soong partnership work as well, given that in 2000, they launched ferocious attacks on each other?
While economic growth in the country has not been as ideal as in the 1990s, voters should note that Taiwan has enjoyed a better economic growth rate than the EU and Japan, with a lower unemployment rate than Hong Kong and the EU. The World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report also ranked Taiwan as fifth in the world and first in Asia last year.
The fact that 500,000 people participated in a mass demonstration of protest against the administration of Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
While blame for the lack of economic growth in Hong Kong since 1997 could be attributed to the 1997 financial crisis, Sept. 11 or SARS, Taiwanese have seen how Hong Kong has not developed more freely in terms of individual freedom since 1997.
Despite China's lack of aggressive threats this time round, other issues such as China's opposition to Taiwan's joining the World Health Organization, especially with memories of the SARS outbreak a year ago, have irked and upset many Taiwanese and international observers, that instead of it being purely a medical and social issue, the Chinese have turned it into a political issue.
Lee has been widely regarded as the founding father of democracy and economic development in Taiwan. It is probably no exaggeration to say that Lee is probably regarded in Taiwan what Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀) is to Singapore or what Mahathir Mohamad is to Malaysia. Would voters want to see Lee's fight for democracy disappear overnight?
The presidential election will shape Taiwan in the coming years.
On paper, both Lien and Chen have the experience and potential of ruling the country, with the former having served as premier and vice president from 1993 to 2000, and the latter having served as Taipei mayor and president.
The key factor is, "Which candidate would safeguard the interests of Taiwanese in the years ahead?"
As a foreign observer, I have to state categorically that only with a Chen victory could Taiwanese remain optimistic about the future.
A Lien victory would only spell "reverse development" for Taiwan. And that would indeed be a shame, considering the efforts of Lee and Chen to build Taiwan on a forward platform. I believe many neutral observers share the same thoughts. Ultimately, the destiny of Taiwan lies in the hands of the voters, who I think will make the right and only choice -- that is to vote for Chen. A victory for Chen equates to a victory for Taiwan.
Jason Lee Boon Hong
Singapore
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval