The current issue of The Economist describes this year's US presidential election as "America's angry election." This is because former Vermont governor Howard Dean, who resolutely opposed the war in Iraq, is likely to run as the Democratic candidate against US President George W. Bush.
But in terms of angry elections, Taiwan has always had the edge on the US.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its ally the People First Party (PFP) have long engaged in negative campaigning.
As the election draws near, the two sides are escalating their attacks against each other. A few days into the new year, the KMT has started using the phrase "kickback-taking president" to cast doubt on President Chen Shui-bian's (
That has forced the normally cheerful first lady Wu Shu-chen (
In addition, Lien has filed a lawsuit against Chen over the DPP's allegations about how he and his father amassed their wealth. Add to this the fact that the two camps are running neck and neck in public opinion polls, and the result is that the people will have to brace themselves for an unusually divisive three months.
This presidential campaign sometimes seems like fight in the mud between elementary school students.
We are not surprised to see the presidential election become so vulgar. Rumors have long circulated that the KMT-PFP camp, lacking the ability to lead a debate on policy, was preparing to run a "retaliatory" campaign.
This campaign has long smelled of cordite.
When Chen's administration proposed a NT$550 billion five-year national construction project, the KMT immediately proposed a NT$2 trillion four-year project.
When Chen promised to conduct a "defensive referendum" and draft a new constitution by 2006, the KMT said it would amend the current Constitution two years earlier and would not oppose the "one country on each side" paradigm.
After the Referendum Law was passed (
Another example of the KMT's tit-for-tat strategy is that after the DPP released information casting doubt on PFP Chairman James Soong's (
The opposition camp has spent all its energy escalating its attacks, and has not been able to propose a decent political platform. This is the most worrisome issue in the campaign.
Governing a country requires more than nasty language and trickery.
Another example of the pan-blue camp's strategy is that they have promised an advantageous 18-percent interest rate on deposits made by retired laborers, which would be on a par with the preferential treatment given to servicemen, teachers and civil servants. This is an attempt to cheat laborers of their votes by offering a policy that the pan-blue camp knows perfectly well is unfeasible.
Eventually the two US presidential candidates will begin to "get angry" at each other over Iraq policy. But Taiwan's two presidential candidates are getting angry now, and getting involved in lawsuits for personal reasons, thereby providing the international community a good laugh at the nation's expense.
All this is the result of the opposition camp's retaliatory campaign strategy. We will find out on election day whether or not the strategy is a winner.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations