Print

Mail

wiki links

New Party, KMT slain by policies on China

The biggest loser in Saturday's elections was the New Party, which only secured one seat in the legislature. Next in line was the KMT, which lost its position as the largest party in the body. Their failures are attributable to many factors, but the role their platforms on cross-strait relations played in their downfalls can't be ignored.

During its campaign, the New Party trumpeted its support for "one country, two systems." This undoubtedly proved fatal and the most basic reason for the party's failure at the polls because accepting "one country, two systems" implies eradicating the ROC. It implies accepting the dictatorial Chinese regime as the governor of democratic Taiwan.

In the last few years, former New Party legislator Elmer Fung (馮滬祥) bent over backwards to do exactly that. His failure in the polls could be considered just retribution. The tragedy is that he dragged the entire New Party down with him.

The KMT's campaign strategists responded relatively quickly to the offensive mounted by the DPP and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU). Their jingles, which ridiculed and attacked the DPP, were of a high standard, showing that their campaign teams still performed pretty well.

In terms of strategy, however, the KMT should have emphasized the economy and taken advantage of its superior financial and economic team to make constructive proposals to turn the economy around. But, for some reason, the KMT's strategy in the early stage of the campaign became all tangled up in "one China, with each side having its own interpreta-tion," and then descended into vicious mudslinging. They only stopped this behavior when the DPP pointed out that it would cost them votes.

In comparison with the New Party and the KMT, the People First Party (PFP) was discreet in its handling of the cross-strait problem -- avoiding the issue as much as possible.

The DPP and the TSU emphasize localization. Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) made radical statements to win people's hearts and the facts prove that this strategy of "de-Sinicization" works.

So why do some people have such an interest in "Sinicization" and go against mainstream opinion? Leaving aside Fung, who often runs to Beijing for instructions, I fear that some people have reached mistaken conclusions about a superficial "China fever," which has in part been stirred up by the media. Even if some businesses and unscrupulous politicians show symptoms of China fever, they know that without support in Taiwan, they wouldn't get respect in China.

China learned a lesson from its past mistakes and essentially adopted a certain reticence, although Minister of Foreign Affairs Tang Jiaxuan (唐家璇) failed to restrain himself on a number of occasions, reminding voters of China's fundamental hostility toward Taiwan.

Regardless of whether China increases its pressure on Taiwan, the government must seek cooperation among parties and members of the political and economic elite and strengthen the sense of unity between different ethnic groups. The DPP must not repeat the mistake of being too eager for quick successes that it made when it first came to power. This is the only way both to counter China and to focus efforts on the revival of the sluggish economy and the healthy development of democracy. The opposition parties should also consider the greater interests of Taiwan first and learn some necessary lessons from this election.

The ruling party must proceed cautiously, making peaceful overtures and striving to make China understand popular opinion in Taiwan. In this way, China's political and economic reforms can be advanced in the interests of the people of both China and Taiwan.

Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.

Translated by Ethan Harkness
This story has been viewed 2593 times.