Opinion is split
I have witnessed quite a few tight elections, in Europe, in the USA and now in Taiwan. When the results are announced and it becomes clear that only a tiny margin separates winner and loser something in both sides' reaction always puzzles me.
The loser apparently feels as if the other just used a dirty trick to take the jackpot or that he got it due to some procedural error. "The people have spoken and they chose me," that's in essence the message of the winner.
Lien Chan (
This was a close race and no matter what the final outcome will be, opinion in Taiwan apparently is split right down the middle.
Of course, it is important, that all open issues are clarified. Lien Chan spoke the minds of his 6.4 million voters when he doubted the validity of the elections. It is the next task of the democratic process in Taiwan to dispel the doubts that hang in the air. But once that is done, the future president and his opponent have to realize, that with every supporter they have gained, they also have gained an opponent for their policies.
They must base their politics on that fact. The people have clearly and unequivocally pointed in two directions. This really requires leadership.
Let's go.
Ralph Jensen
Kaohsiung County
Cut out the dead wood
The winning party in Taiwan's presidential election represents the green bud of democracy in China, the losers the dead wood of a China up against democracy. Historically China has not been about democracy, but about raw power -- at whatever cost.
In the last US presidential election, there was a real question of who won. Al Gore received the most votes. There was a problem with ballots in Florida. Yet Gore conceded graciously to Bush -- and thus averted a constitutional crisis.
The behavior of the KMT is the opposite. They would rip Taiwan apart to get power. Democracy was fine with them as long as it was just a puppet theater with them pulling the strings behind the scenes. But in a democracy that's real, one that actually works, they cry foul.
Granted, these people are past masters when it comes to foul play -- after half a century of rigged elections, phony ballots, bought votes, imprisoned opponents, shut-down newspapers. I don't think anybody questions the KMT's expertise in this area. It's their audacity that shocks, and the level to which they are still willing to stoop.
We see here, played out in advance in Taiwan, what is going to happen in China. There will be a fight between freedom and power. What we see in this election is only a test run. That's why it's so important we get it right here, now -- in Taiwan. It's not just about this nation's future. It's about China's. It's not just about an election. It's about democracy.
Which way is it going to go -- the dead wood or the green bud?
The KMT can kick and they can scream but they can't change history. Neither can China.
William R. Stimson
Taichung
Foresight is needed
It is a time for foresight. It is time for change. Taiwanese democracy is in the midst of a crisis brought about by physical threats and social divisions. In order for democracy to survive, the people must join together as the people of Taiwan.
They must put their loyalty to their country ahead of their loyalty to their party or their ethnicity.
The recent assassination attempt and the KMT's calls to nullify the elections present a grave threat to the future of Taiwanese democracy. These actions will have the effect of further dividing the people of Taiwan into "mainlanders" and "native Taiwanese."
Nullifying the election will set a terrible precedent. If this is allowed to happen there will never again be a presidential election in Taiwan that will not be marred by assassination attempts, bombings and other acts of terrorism. At every turn, Taiwan's fledgling democracy will be usurped by the designs of the totally unscrupulous, those who put ambition before all else.
The consequences of this should be obvious. The US has already set a precedent of intervention in a strategically important country that was to all intents and purposes minding its own business. China will no doubt cite this when it moves to "stabilize" Taiwan "in the best interests of the Taiwanese people."
Whilst it is doing this, it will with the utmost sincerity assure the world that it is merely doing it's best to "maintain the status quo." It will ensure that the disruption to the world's stock markets, international trade and such is kept to a minimum.
China will annex Taiwan as it is, racked by political violence and ethnic divisions. The world will stand by and watch as a stable government is quietly installed in Taipei.
It is hugely important that we allow this election result to stand. As we do this, we must resolve to heal the rifts in our society so future generations of Taiwanese will know freedom.
The truth remains that we are all people, people with a desire for a life of liberty and pursuit of happiness. If this dream is to come about it is necessary that the Taiwanese learn to co-exist in peace. A movement toward Taiwanese unity must begin, free of political ties or bias.
However, sitting in my home thinking about these events, I fear that Taiwanese democracy could have been a mere flicker of freedom. Democracy will be forgotten as the protagonists continue to manipulate their electorates with incisive and dividing rhetoric.
As James Soong (
Mike Bennett, Mark Sheridan
Kaohsiung
Editorial is slanted
As someone who has followed this election from the US and has a personal preference for President Chen, I feel that your editorial on March 21 was completely slanted toward the viewpoint of the DPP for the following reasons:
Why should Lien concede the election when there are big question marks about the would-be assassin of the president and his motivation, the small margin of victory and the number of invalid ballots?
Calling the "pan blues ... yesterday's bunch of vicious, thieving, fascistic thugs who raped and looted Taiwan for half a century," does not further democratic dialogue among citizens, but instead betray your bias against supporters of the former ruling regime. Most of the people who came over in 1949 have already passed away. There are a great number of fair-minded people who simply believe in the same goal as Lien and think that his vision for Taiwan is the correct one. Name-calling simply brings down democratic discourse and promotes violence based on stereotypes.
To say the pan-blue camp rejects any elections they don't win is patently false. In fact, despite only receiving 39 percent of the vote in 2000, President Chen was accepted by ALL parties as the legitimate president of Taiwan.
The fact that the DPP went ahead with the election after the presidential shooting incident is not, as you suggested, "brave."
In fact, it is well-known in every country in the world that such an event so close to the time of voting would logically bring sympathy for the victim of the violent act and increase the tally for the victim. To suggest that it had no positive impact for President Chen at all is at best childish, and possibly furthers the true agenda of the assassin.
Legitimate questions remain regarding your claim that the "election being carried out and the vote tally was impartial." A margin of victory of less than 30,000 out of 13 million votes, in 13,000 polling places,with 330,000 ballots invalidated, which is almost three times greater than the tally in both the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections, and the DPP is the party responsible for the integrity of the voting process. The sum of these facts can, and already has, led many fair-minded people to have some doubt about whether President Chen really won the election.
I would be the absolute first person to defend President Chen against the ludicrous and preposterous allegations that he had himself shot to win the election.
We don't know who the assassin is, and I don't want to make any conjecture at this point. However, what if it was a green supporter who, without the knowledge of anyone else, shot at the president for the very reason to gain sympathy in a tight election race? One might legitimately claim that if President Chen had nothing to do with it, then he should stay president, regardless of whatever actions by someone else, even if he benefited from such actions. However, that is a decision that the Taiwan voters can, and should, have an opportunity to make, once the full truth is known.
Finally, the number of invalid votes, at 330,000, after only about 120,000 in both the 1996 and 2000 elections. The ballots, as it is seen in the Associated Press photographs, appear to be simple, with pictures of the candidates to distinguish the parties.
No complicated Florida ballots, or out-dated machines, chads and dimples seem to be involved.
Of course, invalidating three times the number of ballots could be absolutely legitimate, but for the comfort of supporters of all democracies, an independent party, preferably with outside supervision, verifying the accuracy of the election result would clear away any doubt about this election's legitimacy.
Note that a simple 55 percent to 45 percent preference for Lien in the invalidated ballots would give him a victory. For the legitimacy of democracy, surely one can believe that investigations into the ballots could be done without being tagged as a "thug."
The democracy that emerged in Taiwan over the past decade has been one of the greatest turning points in Asia and a watershed moment in Chinese/Taiwanese history. No longer are the people ruled by emperors or military power; people now have the right to shape their own destiny and where they want their society to go.
I hope the Taiwanese election of 2004 will continue to live up to these ideals, and with the proper review, I believe it will do so.
Steven Yao
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.