Following to the standoff between the opposition and ruling camps -- regarding the Legisla-tive Yuan's use of its power to consent to the president's personnel appointments -- Presi-dent Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) reiterated that he will soon be initiating a cross-party "alliance for national stabilization."
However, no consensus appears to exist so far as to how such an alliance will be organized and run. Even Chen himself has made inconsistent statements on the matter. Therefore, controversy and uncertainty continue to plague the issue.
Irrespective of the constitutional form of government, the leader of any democratic country must endeavor to win over the support of a legislative majority. This is the norm of political democracy.
Having endured more than two years of pain and suffering as a minority government, Chen has finally realized the importance of winning the backing of a legislative majority. The organization of a cross-party "alliance for national stabilization" is consistent with the norms of political democracy.
Under a Cabinet and semi-president system, a coalition government is typically organized in such a way as to secure the backing of a legislative majority for the government. Through personnel and policy exchanges and compromises, the support of other political parties is gained. Under the circumstances, political parties are the basis upon which a coalition government is typically organized. In fact, it is common to see the formal drafting of joint policy guidelines between parties.
On the other hand, under a presidential system where political parties play a softer role, the president is in a position to directly appeal to and communicate with the members of the legislature. The exercise of veto power further provides the basis for the president to control the nation's policies. However, political standoffs between the legislative and executive branches in democracies, especially those with a presidential system, are frequent.
Today, Chen seeks to organize an "alliance for national stabilization" backed by a congressional majority. Unfortunately, since KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Moreover, he has explicitly indicated his refusal to achieve inter-party cooperation through personnel exchanges or policy compromises.
It also remains unclear whether any formal agreement would be drafted, or whether the alliance would be covert or overt. So far, there are not too many precedences in other countries that can serve as references for the organization of an "alliance for national stabilization" in Taiwan.
In addition to appealing to their morality for facilitating "national stability," what possible incentive could opposition lawmakers possibly have for choosing to join an alliance? After all, those members of the opposition camp who are being asked to join the alliance supposedly did not receive offers of Cabinet appointments or compromises in public policy in return. They certainly do not have the endorsement or the backing of their parties should they choose to join the alliance.
Having relinquished all tactics commonly used by democratic countries to organize coalition governments, how will Chen manage to convince so many lawmakers to do the right thing and join his alliance?
This is one question that deserves our attention because it affects the development of Taiwan's democracy.
Wang Yeh-lih is a professor of political science at Tunghai 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
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
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with