The so-called "functional National Assembly" last week overcame obstruction by small parties to overwhelmingly ratify a package of constitutional amendments that included -- most importantly -- the permanent abolition of the assembly itself, a reduction of legislative seats as well as the incorporation of public referendums to approve future constitutional changes.
Wrapping up what President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) characterized as "the first stage of constitutional reform," the opening of the "second-stage constitutional reengineering project" will no doubt provide the next arena for political wrestling.
Despite supporting the first stage of constitutional amendments, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has refused to cooperate with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to undertake more constitutional reforms.
Will Chen and his DPP be able to build public support to push forward the constitutional re-engineering project?
Conventional wisdom says that it is the government that dictates most reforms. But if the political agenda has changed, so has the means of achieving it.
In the case of Taiwan's early constitutional reform, it was strong social pressure that forced most political parties to accept the four proposals for constitutional reform.
This demonstrates that most of the important changes the electorate seeks can be advanced through collective community action. The role of government in this new vehicle for change is to organize, publicize, catalyze and -- sometimes -- partially to subsidize. It is not to govern, but to communicate.
Exhausted by partisan disputes and political wrestling in the legislative branch and disappointed with a severe lack of government effectiveness for nearly a decade, it was the general public -- together with key social groups -- that forced most political parties to endorse the constitutional resolutions in the legislature last August.
The DPP, while upholding the democratic principle of the people's right to hold a referendum on major policies, played an educational role in introducing the right to referendums into the constitutional structure.
Reducing the number of seats in the legislature from 225 to 113 and changing the electoral rules from the old multi-seat system to a new "single-member district, two-vote" system also opens an opportunity to upgrade the quality and efficiency of the legislature.
For decades, Taiwan's unique single non-transferable voting system has been a political tumor to the country's democratic consolidation. It has encouraged the growth of "black gold" politics and an unhealthy legislative culture. The Legislative Yuan has become a political circus full of clowns, with the media playing a supplementary role in encouraging misconduct by reporting antagonism and tension, rather rational policy debates.
Institutional reform is one thing, but finding a way to build a mature political culture constitutes an even more urgent task for Taiwanese politics. Finding ways to use public awareness to drive future constitutional reforms constitutes the greatest challenge for democratization.
As the electorate has become more opinionated and confident, its distrust of politicians, parties and all institutions has become more profound. This shift in the public mood away from blind faith and toward self-reliance constitutes a new demand for public representation.
Constitutional reform is imperative. The agreement on the constitutional amendments last week should be treated as a step toward deepening Taiwan's democracy, rather than just a political contingency for partisan interests.
Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing