How on earth did we get here? After 16 years of peaceful political transformation how did we get to the stage where President Chen Shui-bian (
First, the government deserves credit for its handling of the situation. It must have been tempting to call off the election, given yesterday's events. But this would only further increase the pressure cooker-like atmosphere that has been building up in the last few days, making more violence possible if not inevitable. When bullets start flying it is as well to get people off the streets as quickly as possible. Going ahead with the election was the best way to do this.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was also wise to call off its campaigning for last night. With Chen and Lu in hospital, it might have seemed to have little choice. But the party could have fielded any number of major figures, including respected figures not in themselves politicians such has Nobel Laureate Lee Yuan-tseh (
The plan-blue campaign followed suit, for continuing to campaign while Chen and Lu lay in hospital would have been a solecism too far for the nation's voters.
So far, so responsible. But there were less edifying aspects in some reactions as well. Some pan-blues were quick to try to paint the act as something performed by the DPP in desperation to try to win on a sympathy vote. This was not only as contemptible as anything we have got used to expecting from the pan-blues but it was also amazingly stupid. As the pan-blues, those masters of political deception, know, if you want to create an incident you have a man waving a gun shooting into nowhere. You do not shoot your leader in the stomach.
The irony of yesterday's events is perhaps to show that the ultimate danger to Taiwan is not, pace Chen, China's 500 missiles. Rather it is the vicious political climate in which bitter antagonism has become the norm, with extremism, and extremist violence, the inevitable result.
It is not unjust to accuse one political faction of exacerbating this atmosphere more than another; it is simply a statement of fact. The pan-blues have never been able to accept losing the 2000 election and losing power; they have been deliberately obstructive toward measures necessary for the health of the country, for no other reason than that they refuse to work with the DPP. They have not merely criticized the DPP and government as any opposition worth its salt has to do, but they have become masters of the libelous slur, often sexual in nature, against which an inadequate legal system gives no protection.
What has been fostered in fact is a cult of irrational opposition. It is also a cult of desperate opposition. The pan-blues have not told their followers that if they lose this time they will have another try in four years. They have said that it is now or never; today's vote is the last chance. It is matter of life or death. It certainly was at 1:45 yesterday afternoon.
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the
Since leaving office last year, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has been journeying across continents. Her ability to connect with international audiences and foster goodwill toward her country continues to enhance understanding of Taiwan. It is possible because she can now walk through doors in Europe that are closed to President William Lai (賴清德). Tsai last week gave a speech at the Berlin Freedom Conference, where, standing in front of civil society leaders, human rights advocates and political and business figures, she highlighted Taiwan’s indispensable global role and shared its experience as a model for democratic resilience against cognitive warfare and
The diplomatic dispute between China and Japan over Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s comments in the Japanese Diet continues to escalate. In a letter to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, China’s UN Ambassador Fu Cong (傅聰) wrote that, “if Japan dares to attempt an armed intervention in the cross-Strait situation, it would be an act of aggression.” There was no indication that Fu was aware of the irony implicit in the complaint. Until this point, Beijing had limited its remonstrations to diplomatic summonses and weaponization of economic levers, such as banning Japanese seafood imports, discouraging Chinese from traveling to Japan or issuing
The diplomatic spat between China and Japan over comments Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made on Nov. 7 continues to worsen. Beijing is angry about Takaichi’s remarks that military force used against Taiwan by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” necessitating the involvement of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Rather than trying to reduce tensions, Beijing is looking to leverage the situation to its advantage in action and rhetoric. On Saturday last week, four armed China Coast Guard vessels sailed around the Japanese-controlled Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台), known to Japan as the Senkakus. On Friday, in what