In the past, the democratic transformation of Taiwan was often seen as an "exception" in the third wave of global democratization, because the island was virtually the only example of a direct and smooth transition from a "one-party totalitarian system" to a "one-party control system." Taiwan's newly democratic system entered a new era from the moment Chen Shui-bian
The rarity of the Taiwan experience is in the preservation of the structure of political elites from the totalitarian era, despite a partial re-organization. In fact, the structure continued to head the state machineries under the new democratic system.
On the good side, the process of Taiwan's political transformation was smoother than other new democratic countries. There-fore, Taiwan paid a lower social cost for democratic reforms. Political order never experienced any interruptions. Political instability imposed relatively limited clashes on social and economic developments.
From another angle, this also means that Taiwan's attainment of democracy was not accomplished in one battle. Social costs were paid in installments, with interests.
The new democratic system inevitably retained remnants of the old totalitarianism.
In the past 10 years, efforts at constitutional and political reform were turbulent. Our constitutional system, despite six major revisions, has apparently become trapped by a quicksand of confusion. The scope of constitutional power has faced repeated questioning and challenges. Constitutional principles have regressed.
Most serious of all is that our political leaders repeatedly overstepped the scope of their constitutionally prescribed jobs. Our political elite in general lacked the good faith and morals to comply with the game rules of democracy. Our party leaders repeatedly treated negotiations over constitutional amendments as bargaining chips in power struggles.
As the newly emerging democratic system never before experienced the challenge posed by a rotation of ruling parties, many flaws and inadequacies in the system have remained hidden. Without going through a drastic political restructuring, it would have been difficult to solve all the problems.
The recent presidential election exposed important short-comings in our democratic system including: the lack of fairness and transparency in the election process, politicians' non-compliance with the democratic process, lack of protection for opposition parties' right to participate in government, the administrative bias of the state machinery, the bias of the state-owned media, the lack of autonomy in the private sector and the quality of candidates.
Most worrisome is that for many people, identification with a certain ethic group or political party far exceeds the importance they place on the democratic process. Therefore, politicians became uninhibited and ruthless in their dealings with opponents. The judiciary, control agencies, media, and professional groups all became involved in the political controversies and took sides. Not only did they fail to remain impartial, they became accomplices in the attack on the democratic process.
After the election, President-elect Chen paid numerous visits to his opponents and enemies in the hopes of ushering in a period of total reconciliation, to help Taiwan leave behind the passionate antagonism of the election and begin the healing process.
Chen's efforts are definitely praiseworthy. However, the new administration must also face the various problems and inadequacies in our democratic system exposed by the election. Chen should bring the main social forces together to clean up the residual poisons of the past and turn ideals of human right protection, a diversified society and political equality into concrete realities.
During the KMT rule, the DDP was a victim of the inappropriate integration between the KMT and government, the lack of impartiality of civil servants, the lack of independence for the judiciary and control mechanisms and the failure to nationalize the military and the intelligence system.
With the DPP taking up the reins of power, now is the time to strengthen the foundation of Taiwan's democracy.
The best way to eradicate the residual poisons of the past is not to try to rectify the human rights violations and political persecution of the past. Rather, it is to courageously say "no" to the temptation presented by the remnants of totalitarianism to serve their "new master," to protect the power of the Constitution and to assure human rights, administrative impartiality, judicial independence and the nationalization of the military and intelligence system.
Even more important, the new leader must directly face the fact that the soil in which our constitutional principles were planted has been subjected to prolonged pollution. We must seriously face the social costs imposed by the prolonged instability of constitutional order.
The biggest obstacle to the rebuilding of constitutional principles is the eagerness of individual politicians' to treat large-scale constitutional amendments as their personal accomplishments and their lack of determination to uphold the Constitution. The key to rebuilding constitutional principles is reconstructing the soul of politicians.
Whether the new administration will be able replant the foundation of constitutional principles deep enough that they can never be uprooted, rather than use the constitutional system as a tool for short-term political manipulation, will determine Chen's place in Taiwan's democratic history.
Chu Yun-han is a professor of political science at National Taiwan University.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath