During the DPP's Ninth National Congress meeting, President Chen Shui-bian (
At the present time, the DPP has executive power, but it is severely constrained by its lack of legislative power. The DPP has faced frequent and deliberate opposition boycotts. Many policy proposals have therefore become the focus of battles of words between the parties. Bills have often either been approved in a peremptory manner or viciously voted down out of rage. The national budgets were reduced in an irrational manner. All these, together, have become obstacles to policy implemen
tation.
Chen and DPP members therefore hope that the DPP will have an opportunity to lead the legislature, thereby facilitating the implementation of its policies. The DPP is not, however, in a position to win a legislative majority. That is why the president proposes cross-party alliances. Others have gone as far as to call for a joint Cabinet.
While a joint Cabinet is certainly one option to be considered, it is not the only option. In fact as a DPP member or supporter, one should not even broach the subject at this stage. I believe the president simply hopes that the DPP will strengthen cooperation with non-DPP groups. These could include any party. It doesn't matter who takes charge; cooperation is to be encouraged if it helps policy implementation, brings back rationality, and involves individuals holding the same ideals. As for whether the cooperation is to take the form of a joint Cabinet or to remain simply at the inter-party level, that depends. It is not something to be decided in advance.
Inside the DPP, a joint Cabinet remains merely a topic of discussion. Some people outside the party, however, have begun talking about the pre-conditions for a joint Cabinet, and speculating that the DPP's motive is to divide the opposition, when in fact placing too much emphasis on a joint Cabinet will not help the DPP.
One problem with just talk is that voters may think it indicates a lack of confidence on the part of the DPP in its ability to perform well in the elections. Secondly, it would cause DPP members to lose faith in the party. In the end, the DPP would become unable to distinguish itself from other political parties. One-sided wishful thinking by the DPP about a joint Cabinet, therefore, would create a crisis. We should not underestimate the potential damage.
A joint Cabinet can become a reality only when all the parties involved agree on it. The parties have talked about a reconciliation for a long time, yet the standoff remains. No one trusts one another. No one is willing to take a back seat. It is too early, therefore, to even begin talking about a joint Cabinet. Attempts to put together a joint Cabinet right now will only create unnecessary political instability and generate more suspicion among the parties. It is okay to treat the issue as a topic of leisurely discussion, and an option in the future reorganization of the Cabinet.
As for different issue-specific alliances among the parties, we should learn to perceive them as the norm. Last year's presidential election took place in a backdrop with such alliances. If we become too serious about a joint Cabinet, the greater the expectation, the greater the disappointment. It will facilitate neither the government's ability to implement policy nor any reconciliation between the parties.
Yen Chin-fu is a DPP lawmaker.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which