Taiwan's political landscape has gone through a subtle change as the new government takes over power. The power structure seems to have remained the same, but the new government has a very different style from the old one -- as exemplified by the very different list of national policy advisors
On the list are many dissidents who suffered persecution during the martial law era. Apart from prominent members of the "tangwai"
Of course, there are also a significant number of business and local faction leaders, as well as academics and professionals. However, the inclusion of former political prisoners and Taiwan independence activists bring an unprecedented mix of colors to the new government.
The list also has a unique kaleidoscopic feature rarely seen in other democracies. There are quite a few senior KMT officials on the list -- at least two former vice presidents, one former premier, a former secretary-general of the presidential office, two members of the KMT Central Standing Committee, plus former government ministers from the KMT.
These positions are basically political arrangements and in practice, the advisors have very little power. In fact, this is a system incompatible with democratic principles, though it is a very convenient one for those in power. It serves to soothe those who lost out in the race for official positions. The posts can also be used as chips in the exchange of political favors. In other words, the system can help stabilize domestic politics. It is no coincidence that both sides of the Taiwan Strait have similar institutions for such advisors.
Style is one of the most salient differences between the new and the old Cabinets. In 1990, many writers and former political prisoners became ministers in Vaclav Havel's new Czech government. Many of them appeared awkward and shy -- not even knowing the appropriate clothes to wear. But those people brought a refreshing vitality to the government.
Similarly, almost no one in Taiwan's new Cabinet knows how to play golf. Many of them do not know how to "wine and dine" or appreciate gourmet food. Some even do not know how to wear ties. In the KMT's official culture, these people would be total misfits. Fortunately, the aristocratic etiquette that developed under the KMT's half-century rule is now going out of fashion.
All the status, arrogance and habits represented by the old government have been replaced by the spirit of the new.
While we do not know how long it will last, we are glad to see a change for once.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS