Recent discussion from within the pan-blue camp on whether Ma Ying-jeou's (
Nevertheless, there are at least four hurdles that Ma and Wang will have to jump before publicly unveiling their intention to run in the next presidential election.
First, given KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (連戰) refusal to step down to take responsibility for the electoral loss on March 20 and his attempt to consolidate his leadership by proposing a merger between the KMT and the People First Party (PFP), it now is up to Ma and Wang, the KMT's two leading heavyweights, to step out and launch a power transition.
So far, Ma and Wang have seemed to put their bets on another KMT loss in December's legislative elections. However, the price of letting Lien ruin the KMT again is a huge burden that both Ma and Wang cannot undertake. The question is, do they have the guts to challenge Lien right now? Apparently the time is not ripe for them to reveal concrete moves toward the chairmanship, let alone the path toward the presidency.
The second element involves the possible effects of a KMT-PFP merger. For the short term, since the KMT and the PFP have had various "exit strategies" in dealing with what they characterized as the "illegitimate" DPP administration, this complicates the potential approaches that a KMT-PFP hybrid might take.
The latest public opinion poll conducted by Formosa Survey Research and released by Taiwan Advocates showed that the two-month-long protest and resistance campaign launched by the pan-blue alliance against President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) re-election has backfired, estranging many of its own supporters. Even Ma and Wang have expressed reservations on the hawkish strategy and warned the pan-blue camp not to be dragged into this political quicksand.
As KMT moderates, Ma and Wang have selectively supported decisions made by Lien regarding what the KMT would do about what it portrayed as an "unfair" election. Nor has either man fully endorsed Lien's plan to pursue a merger with James Soong's (
The third challenge facing Ma and Wang is dealing with a potential Soong candidacy, as speculation on Soong running in 2008 has not diminished. To some extent the PFP as a whole also needs Soong's personal charisma to extend its own support base. Lien's push for the merger will inevitably create a power struggle between Soong, Ma and Wang.
Finally, the competition between Ma and Wang constitutes their biggest challenge. Numerous pan-blue pundits look to Ma as the "the one" in 2008. Although Ma has been criticized for his lack of firmness and failure to organize a capable administrative team, he nonetheless continues to enjoy popularity and media favor. Ironically, Ma's main weakness lies largely in his prudence, as he often misses opportunities to take the initiative.
On the other hand, Wang was born a politician and raised from the rank-and-file. His grass-roots personality and Taiwanese ethnicity earned him much support in southern Taiwan. He is good at political maneuvering, but lacks executive experience.
Given that both have different ideas on the timing and tactics for their candidacies, can they establish a joint ticket in 2008? They would be the perfect combination for the pan-blue camp in terms of compensating for each other. Yet the lure of being boss will decrease the chance that they will do so.
Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.
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