There are fewer than 20 days until the legislative election. The election is a key battle that will decide whether the pan-blue camp can maintain its legislative majority and continue to hold more seats in the legislature. Alternatively, the pan-green camp may enjoy a legislative majority for the first time, and hold in its grasp both the legislative and executive powers.
As the election campaign reaches an all-time high in terms of intensity, one cannot help but feel perplexed. The campaign's spirit of rowdiness seems to come mostly from deliberate manipulations of debate topics and the use of campaign gimmicks. Although it's an important and critical campaign, voters have not actually been informed of any positive campaign platforms.
The only things being fed to them are fistfights between political camps and debate topics being tossed out nonchalantly, one after another. These are issues that have virtually taken over front page newspaper headlines every day. This type of campaigning is comparable to stocks whose prices are driven over the top by speculation.
The worrisome thing is this: the present campaign race has failed not only to outline a vision for its policy proposals, but it has become only an extension of the presidential election through which the parties seek to settle their scores once and for all. The only difference between this upcoming election and the March 20 presidential election is that this election is being fought by party representatives.
While on the surface it is an election race between a group of pan-green and pan-blue candidates, the real leading characters are still President Chen Shui-bian (
If presidential and legislative races are considered indicators of democratization and nativization, then Taiwan has completely left behind the shadow of its authoritarian past. In particular, the 2000 presidential election brought changes to the ruling party, helping facilitate judiciary independence, education reform, and in particular education of history. It also stressed a loyalty of the military exclusively to the government, rather than to any particular political parties.
As a result, the dignity and human rights of the people of Taiwan were safeguarded, in the process shattering the plots of the conservative forces to revive the old system of government monopolized by the KMT. This historical evolution ensured the implementation of political democracy in Taiwan.
However, democratic reforms entail much more than the establishment of a political system: they also give substance to the system established. One hopes that the legislative election this year can indeed elevate the quality and substance of Taiwan's democracy and give the country a new sense of direction and vitality. One cannot but feel disappointment in view of the performance of both ruling and opposition camps thus far, and offer some words of advice.
Up to now, the hottest topics in the campaign have been none other than the "soft coup" and "mixing the national and KMT emblems," both raised by Chen. As a result, no talk shows in Taiwan can steer clear of these topics for even a day. At the same time, fearing to pale in comparison, the printed media is giving extensive coverage to these topics of discussion.
According to staff members of the Presidential Office, all the campaign debate topics of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) were personally decided by President Chen. The DPP Legislative Caucus Chairman Lee Chun-yi (
It is not that topics such as "soft coup" and national and party emblems cannot be debated or that they are bad topics. However, these topics on the one hand exacerbate grudges left behind from the past presidential election, and on the other hand highlight the KMT's past in confusing the party with the government.
To this day, the pan-blues are still refusing to concede defeat in the presidential election and there seems to be no end to its rallies and protests. In fact, it went as far as to doubt the impartiality of the judiciary after the verdict was handed down on its lawsuit to overturn the result of the presidential election. Such disregard for principles of democracy and the public welfare is of course less than praise-worthy and should be condemned.
The confusion between national and KMT party emblems is something that should be addressed and corrected as well, so as to turn Taiwan into a "normal" country. They should not be allowed to linger on, becoming unbreakable political curses.
However, the pan-greens' call for voters to give them a legislative majority is not convincing enough if these are the sole reason. This is turning the elections into a process through which old scores and grudges are to be settled.
On the other hand, the campaign strategies of the pan-blues are even worse. They give absolutely no reason for praise. They are not only equally short of vision and policy proposals, but also pale in comparison with the pan-greens in terms of the ability to handle topics.
Especially annoying is the fact that Lien and Soong still refuse to concede defeat in the March election. They still do not dare to face reality. As a result, the opposition parties -- who are supposed to monitor and counter the ruling party -- have in fact become the roots of destruction of social stability and political chaos.
In this election campaign, they have reiterated their contempt for Chen, accusing him of foul play and fraud in the presidential election, and calling him names like dictator, totalitarian, among others. They have gone all out in attacking the head of their own country in interviews with foreign media. Lien and Soong have been unable to issue any new blueprint that brings hope.
The presidential election is over. The upcoming election is not round two of the presidential election. The voters are not obliged to continue a never-ending game with these two old men -- Lien and Soong.
Democratic countries need powerful opposition party, so as to keep the ruling party in line and avoid political corruption. The refusal of the pan-blues to accept defeat in the presidential election has made it incapable of serving as a functioning opposition party.
Using controversy from the last presidential election as the theme of the legislative election campaign has turned this contest into round two of the presidential race. Under the circumstances, it has become extremely hard for voters to convince themselves they should support a pan-blue legislative majority.
The rough outline of Taiwan's political democracy is there. However, substance-wise, there is much room for improvement. In this ongoing legislative election campaign, the pan-blue and pan-green camps are pretty close in terms of strength. But the result of the election could bring major changes to the political dynamics of the country.
Voters hope that this can be a visionary election campaign. Therefore, the two sides should reveal more to voters their vision of Taiwan's future direction, and contribute a more enriched and refined substance to Taiwan's political democracy.
We do not need past grudges and ghosts of the past to keep us from moving forward. Taiwan must move on. The voters must vote based on the ability and character of the candidates.
Both the candidates and the political parties should highlight a comprehensive platform and outline the concrete steps they would take to accomplish these goals. This way, voters can make informed choices.
There is a need for more moderation and rational thinking, and both parties must abandon the war of words which wastefully consumes energy.
As the election campaign enters its final phase, it is hoped that the opposition and ruling party can modify their campaign themes and move beyond manipulation of debate topics. Don't let them turn the legislative election into an extension of the presidential election. Make positive and constructive proposals about the future, so as to help Taiwan establish a quality political democracy and a peaceful way of life.
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