Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: In debate, Lien seized no initiative

Yesterday, the long-awaited first round of live televised debates between the two presidential candidates -- President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) -- took place. Overall, while Chen's performance was, as expected, more aggressive than Lien's, the two candidates maintained a relatively calm and rational composure throughout.

Before the debate, some commentators had said that in order to score in the debate Lien would need to leave behind his usual conservatism and go on the offensive for a change so as to attack the incumbent where it hurts. While Lien's efforts in this regard were evident, they simply weren't enough.

Even on the domestic issues that affect people's daily lives -- such as educational reform and economic growth, issues which are not only the focal points of Lien's campaign but were included among the debate topics at the insistence of the pan-blue camp -- Lien did not enjoy the upper hand. One obvious reason for this, and a fundamental problem for the pan-blue camp's campaign, is Lien's inability to offer solutions to problems once he has pointed out that they exist.

Another fatal flaw for Lien is that many of the problems he pointed out in the debate were as quickly pointed out by Chen to be attributable -- if not entirely, at least predominantly -- to government policies in the KMT era, including some policies decided on by the Executive Yuan when Lien was premier. One case in point was the Nine-Year Educational Program (九年一慣國民教育).

The fact that many urgently needed pieces of legislation remain buried in the Legislative Yuan, where the pan-blue camp enjoys an absolute majority, also crippled Lien in many respects. Cases in point are the political donations bill and the Judicial Yuan organization bill. Lien has been unable to offer persuasive explanations as to why these bills -- which he had supposedly endorsed and supported since the KMT era -- still await passage.

This is not to mention that Lien failed -- either intentionally or unintentionally -- to directly respond to Chen's request for a promise that the political donations bill be passed by the end of the month.

This is fatal considering that Chen has promised to place all of his personal assets in a trust if he is re-elected, so as to avoid future skepticism about illegal political donations and corruption.

On the issue of the KMT's ill-gotten assets, it was a major strategic error by Lien to defend his party on legal grounds, when the majority of the voters already believe that such assets were illegally gotten. What he should have done was to promise to return whatever rightfully belongs to the country and the people.

On the national referendum, Lien made the mistake of misquoting the relevant language of provisions of the Referendum Law (公民投票法). He said that a change in status quo regarding sovereignty is the precondition for a defensive referendum. As Chen quickly pointed out, the specific language is "whenever the country is faced by an external threat that could interfere with national sovereignty." Chen went on to to argue persuasively that if we wait until China starts a war to hold a referendum, it will be too late.

Lien tried to take the offensive by asking Chen for evidence backing up allegations that Lien and his party are favored by China and manipulated by Beijing. While Chen's answers have been evasive, the problem for Lien, if this type of question continues being asked, is that Lien won't get any brownie points either, since the pan-blue camp has made so many unverifiable allegations against Chen and his family.

In any event, it is encouraging to see this debate finally take place. Now it is up to the voters to decide for themselves who speaks more convincingly and then make informed decisions about whom to vote for.
This story has been viewed 2873 times.