In analyzing the key factors that might be attributed to the result of the Kaohsiung mayoral election, one can identify a number of key points that were scored and lost by the two major candidates.
On the KMT's part, considering that the pan-blue camp didn't really join forces until the last minute, KMT candidate Huang Jun-ying (黃俊英), to a certain extent, could be said to have fought a successful battle.
Looking deeper into Kaohsiung's political landscape, the KMT's long-time rule in the city in the past decades had allowed it to cultivate a solid support base at the grassroots level. The mobilization forces of the party's local factions remain strong after four years of the DPP, as shown by the margin of about 25,000 votes between the two.
In the last elections, many of the teachers and public servants -- traditional staunch supporters of the KMT -- switched their support to the DPP's Hsieh. But Huang's background as a university professor and the discrepancy between Hsieh's reform measures and the people's expectations might have helped Huang regain at least a good portion of these votes.
Still, there are a number of things that might have cost the former deputy Kaohsiung mayoral the election.
To start, Huang failed to articulate what he had to offer for the city's future development. In particular, Huang seemed to have been virtually sidelined in his own campaign in the last two days before the election.
The media's attention was not drawn so much to Huang himself as to the political heavyweights that were or were not stumping for him.
Also, by resorting to a single campaign strategy -- challenging Hsieh's integrity over a NT$4.5 million check from a businesswoman during his stint as a lawmaker -- in the last 48 hours of the campaign, the KMT achieved counterproductive effects. There was minimal debate on the differences of the two candidates' policies and visions.
It seemed to me that the supporters of the pan-blue camp cast their votes for Huang because of their identification with the political party, not the politician.
These factors might have had an adverse effect on drawing the support of non-partisan or independent voters.
On the DPP's side, that Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) won his re-election bid showed that the achievements of his administration in the past four years, despite insufficient media exposure, were still recognized by the residents of the city.
Unlike the KMT's supporters, the DPP supporters in Kaohsiung identified themselves more with the individual candidates than with political parties.
Hsieh also owed his hard-earned triumph partly to the KMT's excessive negative campaigning strategies, especially in the last days of the campaign. The muckraking tactics deployed in the campaign went too far and became a double-edged sword.
One of the unique characteristics of voters in Kaohsiung is that they have the tendency to sympathize with the underdog, and by cornering Hsieh, the KMT made Hsieh look like one.
As far as I know, a number of the non-partisan voters or those voters who might not have bothered to cast their ballet were probably ignited by the negative campaign strategies and voted for Hsieh.
But the fact that Hsieh's victory did not come as easy as previously thought is quite surprising.
There are a number of points to be noted. The first being that despite Hsieh's hardwork in bettering the city in the past four years, there seemed to be a gap between what he achieved and the need and expectations of the city residents.
For example, he put much effort into the redesign of old communities in the city, but this was not much appreciated by the local residents.
Second, the relations between his administration and the local media remained much to be desired. Reporting of what he and members of his administration have been doing was either insufficient or unfavorable.
So I think Mayor Hsieh and his administration, in moving toward the second tenure, should bear these points in mind.
And as for what light the election result might shed on the future political landscape in southern Taiwan, it proved yet again that in a face-off between the pan-green and pan-blue camps, Kaohsiung is still the stronghold of the DPP.
It will be the vital resources and support basis in President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) re-election bid in the 2004 presidential election.
But, judging from the difficulties that Hsieh encountered in his re-election, Chen will need to take a few lessons on board before starting out.
Bob Kuo is deputy chairman of the Taiwan Southern Society.
Compiled by Wu Pei-shih
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