The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), in an apparent attempt to absorb its ally's call for renaming the country and enacting a new constitution, pledged last week to use "Taiwan" in the names of government agencies within two years. As the legislative election enters its final stage, the party's ally, the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), led by former president Lee Teng-hui (
The TSU, the more left-wing and Taiwan-centered fundamentalist party, has the enacting of a new constitution and a new name for Taiwan as its main appeal to voters. The DPP, under the guidance of Chen's May 20 inauguration speech, has stuck with a more incremental constitutional re-engineering process in accordance with current game rules.
As the campaign becomes more of an internal finger-pointing by the pan-green camp, the DPP's ability to distinguish its major campaign appeal from the TSU's constitutes its most difficult job. The pie is not large enough to share at the level of grass roots and individual constituencies; sometimes there is no clear line between friend and foe. Taiwan's unique voting system means candidates even compete with contenders from their own party. That sparks intra-party friction, not to mention tight competition with party allies.
The fact that the TSU draws most of its support from southern Taiwan makes the TSU-DPP collaboration even more difficult. It is natural for the smaller TSU to choose a more extreme path to expand support. As the TSU's more independence-driven appeals have shattered the DPP's grassroots voter base, Chen has had no choice but to incorporate a new tactic to enlarge the middle ground and to absorb the TSU's manipulation of the issues concerning a new constitution and renaming the country.
To minimize the TSU's effect, Chen has stressed that he is the defender of Taiwan's identity. He has also highlighted that Taiwan's identity is not tantamount to changing the country's official national title until a majority consensus has been reached by the public. By portraying himself as a "balancer" among pluralist forces in democratic Taiwan, Chen aims to convince voters that compared with the pan-blue camp's slogans of "safeguarding the ROC" and the TSU's "building a new nation," only the DPP can lead the country in a peaceful, stable and prosperous direction.
Chen must do it carefully, without sabotaging DPP-TSU cooperation after the election. Chen must find a balance in building a cooperative and competitive partnership with the TSU, while ensuring a majority of pan-green seats after the Dec. 11 elections. Compared with their counterparts, pan-green supporters enjoy a chance of consolidating a majority in the Legislative Yuan. Nevertheless, questions related to election strategies, each party's campaign appeals and vote distribution will inevitably cause friction within the green camp.
Pre-electoral rhetoric within the green camp is simply a product of Taiwan's unique electoral system. What matters are the results of the legislative poll. Were the pan-green camp to become a de facto majority in the legislature, it would vindicate the intensification of Taiwan consciousness coupled with the March presidential election. With the TSU representing Taiwan-independence fundamentalists, the DPP may move to the middle of the political spectrum and lead national development in a more gradual and peaceful way.
The interests of voters will be best served by a pan-green majority, primarily because it is conducive to promoting good governance, legislative efficiency, stable and institutionalized party competition and, most important, a unified country under the theme of "Taiwan First."
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS