The visit of Anthony Giddens, the British academic famed for his "third way" theory, has created a major frenzy in Taiwan, especially among government officials and politicians. This of course has much to do with the fact that Giddens' theory inspired President Chen Shui-bian's (
Giddens' theory is based on a perceived need to provide an alternative to the traditional left-wing and right-wing policies in the face of globalization, development of a knowledge-based economy and individualism. Of course, the basis of the division between the traditional left and right in politics is primarily their polarized positions on economic and social policies.
If people here in Taiwan really understood Giddens' theory, they would have been able to ask him questions to help adapt his "third way" to the situation in Taiwan. The main question is: How can there be a "third way" in Taiwan when one can hardly find a real left-wing party?
The KMT, the source of the "black gold" problem is, naturally, not a contender. The PFP's stance on economic and social issues remains a big blur to most people. As for the TSU, at the core of its platform is a recognition of Taiwan's sovereignty, and all of its economic and social policy proposals so far have been aimed at furthering that end. Under the circumstances, the closest thing to a left-wing party is the DPP. Unfortunately, while the DPP may have had an anti-business image in the past, the party has failed to propose or even engage in serious debates about any comprehensive social-welfare schemes.
This political vacuum has much to do with the fact that any hint of left-wing tendencies was virtually eradicated during the White Terror of the 1950s. In fact, the "left" was once virtually synonymous with the "Communist bandits" on the other side of the Taiwan Strait. During the martial law era, even possessing one of Karl Marx's books could get a person into serious trouble.
Rather than the traditional left and right typically seen the West, Taiwan's political parties are aligned according to their cross-strait stance. The love-hate relationships among the four major parties are completely driven by the independence-unification issue. Between two parties on opposite sides of this divide there can never be any alliance, even if they agree in other areas. For example, before the New Party imploded, it was actually a lot closer to the DPP when it came to a desire to eliminate "black gold" politics. But that was not enough to turn the two into friends.
Can there be a "third way" on the cross-strait issue? It seems unimaginable. Where is the middle ground when it comes to recognition of Taiwan's sovereignty? Many people have offered proposals on Taiwan-China relations -- ranging from a confederation model to something along the lines of the EU. But the problem is that the cross-strait relationship is not solely defined by Taiwan's position. No matter how many olive branches Taipei may offer in trying to find a "third way," Beijing is unlikely to accept any of them. China sees only one way -- "one China."
Would a "third way" on cross-strait relations mean just letting things take their natural course without any active intervention? That would imply allowing Taiwan's high-tech industry to freely relocate to China, along with any other businesses who wanted to go. Such a belief bodes ill for Taiwan.
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.