When it became clear that US President George W. Bush had won a second term, many of my American friends' disappointment was obvious. Many people in the US told me that if Bush won, the US would not be the place to be anymore. And many people outside of the US told me they aren't going back for another four years.
It goes without saying Senator John Kerry has shown himself to be a true disciple of democracy in conceding defeat, accepting the fact that whilst it was a close race, nevertheless the majority of voters had opted for Bush.
Many commentators have pointed out that Bush won, not over foreign policies, the economy or taxes, but on moral values -- on his opposition to gay marriage and his constant presentation of his leadership as a matter of religious faith and principle. In effect, the Republican Party mobilized the conservative forces to vote in this record turnout election.
Across the Pacific Ocean on the same day, Taiwan's High Court rejected a lawsuit contesting the March presidential election and upheld President Chen Shui-bian's (
Pan-blue legislative candidates said things along the lines of: "I know your disappointment in the bias and untrustworthiness of our legal system. The courts have disappointed us by yielding to political pressure. But do not let your emotions get carried away. Instead turn your sadness into votes in the legislative elections."
The poignant similarity between the 50-50 social division in US and Taiwan is understandable: the public has their beliefs and a right to their choices. But the parallel stops there.
Deliberate distortion of fact and of the image of the justice system by these vote-hungry legislative candidates take Taiwan back 200 years. Considering that it has been less than 20 years since the birth of democracy in Taiwan, this chaotic state might be forgivable. But from a legal perspective, one can only give a long sigh. The opposition invariably claims im-proper conduct in elections when they lose. Now they are also claiming improper legal proceedings, downright bias and political maneuverings after they lost the legal suit. Everything is wrong and unfair, unless it's in their favor.
But these politicians' claims do not stem from an inability to accept the fact that they lost the presidential election, nor a lack of faith in the integrity of the legal system -- but because by making such claims, the public's emotions can be manipulated to gain votes.
I feel much the same as my Democratic friends who want to abandon or leave the US. I too, would like to block out the scenes created by the selfish politicians in Taiwan, who, simply because it might get them more votes, have no concern for the damage they are causing to the fundamental rule of law in the country. But just as I would tell my US friends that while the majority of the voters walk on the "right" side of the political spectrum now, the liberal values held by the younger generation will overcome the old conservative values in the days to come. Perhaps I should say that to myself about Taiwan.
Although the pro- and anti-independence division will exist as long as the cross-strait situation stays the same, there will still be a younger generation who can be more logical and discerning in face of the machinations of selfish politicians. But how long will it take for these vote-hungry politicians to grow up and respect democracy and the legal system of this country?
Wen Wei-ni is a freelance writer based in Taipei.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past