During the past few weeks, Taiwan was prominently on display in the window of the world. Elections are generally exciting fare in any circumstances, but one can imagine that the Taiwanese people could have done with a bit less excitement this time around. Still, it is good to analyze the situation in Taiwan, and see how it looks from the perspective of western Europe.
Before going into the current situation, it is necessary to recall that Taiwan has come a long way from the repressive one-party state of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which held the nation in its iron grip from the mid-1940s through the end of the 1980s. The democratic transition which took place was primarily due to the hard work of the democratic movement, led by President Chen Shui-bian's (
In any society which goes through a major democratic transition, there are always elements which hark back to the undemocratic"good old days." In Russia and eastern Europe, there are such remnants of the communist parties. In Taiwan, at least a part of the KMT/People First Party (PFP) opposition seem to fall into this category: They cannot accept that Taiwan has become democratic and the DPP has come to power.
In addition to the democratic versus non-democratic dichotomy, there is the Taiwanese-minded orientation of Chen's DPP versus the Chinese-minded orientation of the present leadership of the KMT/PFP. During the 40 years of martial law, political power was virtually exclusively in the hands of the Chinese Mainlanders who came over with Chiang Kai-shek (
Still, Chen and his DPP have emphasized ethnic harmony: Anyone who loves Taiwan is considered Taiwanese, irrespective of ethnic origin. The present leadership in the KMT/PFP, on the other hand, has whipped up ethnic discord by twisting and distorting Chen's position.
Going into the election, the issue of a referendum was a major one. In any democratic society, a referendum is a commonplace mechanism to gauge the views of the population on a particular issue. In Taiwan it became a hot potato because its giant neighbor China doesn't like democracy, and the prospect of the Taiwanese people starting to use democratic means certainly looks blasphemous in the eyes of the communist dictatorship.
The problem was compounded when US President George W. Bush got into the act last December: Eager to placate visiting Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (
In spite of the fact that the blue camp jumped on the pro-China bandwagon and urged supporters to boycott the referendum (even the watered-down version), some 7.45 million voters expressed themselves in the referendum, with some 91 percent in favor of the purchase of additional weapons to counter China's threat. The fact that the referendum didn't make it was thus due to the high threshold -- 50 percent of the registered voters. With such a threshold most referendums wouldn't make it in western Europe either.
Next is the issue of the closeness of the outcome of the vote. In this, Taiwan is not unique. In many countries there have been close elections. But the essence of democracy is that the loser graciously concedes, and awaits his next turn. In Taiwan, we instead saw the spectacle of KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Large numbers of international observers, including ourselves, can attest that the election process was orderly and that the counting was scrupulous. If there were reports of irregularities, they were of Lien and his party buying votes on a large scale, in particular paying for the tickets of thousands of China-based businessmen returning home to vote.
And then there was the assassination attempt. In any society this would have led to expressions of deep concern also from the opposition -- for the safety and well-being of the victims. But instead of focusing anger on the fact that such a reprehensible act could take place in Taiwan's traditionally peaceful society, Lien and Soong twisted things around and alleged that the assassination attempt had been staged.
This is simply ludicrous. If one would stage such a thing, then one would not do it in broad daylight, in the middle of a crowded street, with TV cameras rolling. The suggestion itself is testimony to the twisted minds of Lien and his followers.
If there are "clouds of secrecy, manipulation and mistrust" hanging over Taiwan, they are due to the hate campaigns of the pan-blue Lien-Soong ticket. They are simply sore losers who do not have the foggiest idea of what democracy is all about.
Where does Taiwan go from here? Getting back to normal is only possible if the KMT/PFP alliance atones for its mistakes and goes through a speedy reform process in which the old leadership is ditched, so that a new Taiwan-oriented leadership can come to the fore and lead the two parties toward a democratic role in society.
From the European perspective, we congratulate Chen and the DPP on his re-election, and for making democracy work in Taiwan spite of mountainous challenges. That is no small accomplishment, but the work is far from being complete. We wish Taiwan and its people well on the arduous road toward international recognition and a full and equal place as a member of the international family of nations. Many years from now, we will look back at March 2004 and conclude that it was an important watershed in Taiwan's history.
Gerrit van der Wees is editor of Taiwan Communique in the Hague.
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