Not long ago, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) claimed that he is healthy enough to run for election again.
Despite his ambition, we only saw his anger.
He complained that he "must make some people nervous" by showing them that they cannot take advantage of him.
In Soong's grumbling, one can see the bitterness of a once-mighty politician brought low -- and an illustration of the unpredictable rise and fall of Taiwan's political stars.
Within six years, Soong's popularity has plummeted. When President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) rose to power on the wave of Taiwanese consciousness, hopes were high.
But now his popularity is at much the same level as Soong's, and is only half that of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰).
Lien has become Taiwan's most popular politician for doing nothing. The whole thing is incredible.
Soong's decline has very little to do with the Chen-Soong meeting (扁宋會) in February. The fundamental reason lies further back in history.
Both nativization and democratization are historical trends in Taiwan.
But the pan-blue camp's supporters treated these trends as something evil.
They were eager to look for a savior to reverse these trends, and in the beginning they put their hopes in the New Party. At that time, they saw Soong as former president and KMT chairman Lee Teng-hui's (李登輝) executioner and had a profound hatred for him.
However, after Soong left the KMT, they immediately saw him as the new savior, and many pledged their loyalty to him. Although the quality of the New Party's legislators was better than those in the PFP, the party was abandoned and disappeared overnight.
While Soong was repeatedly defeated by Chen, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) won two mayoral elections. Because of this Ma became more popular than Soong.
Although Ma has neither Soong's great talent nor bold vision, and is unable to take over all the pan-blue camp supporters, the PFP is the party that's about to collapse.
I repeatedly said in 2003 that this trend is unstoppable. Since their supporters largely overlap, I said that when the pan-blue camp supporters gathered in front of the Presidential Office to protest against the presidential election results, the fiercest battle was not that between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, or that between dark and light blues, but that between Ma's and Soong's supporters. This has proven to be the case.
Even as some of Soong's supporters shift their loyalties and go their own way, he has lost control of those who have remained in his party. The Chen-Soong meeting was merely the straw that broke the camel's back.
Now Soong has once again announced that he is capable of running for election.
He has also attempted to influence the KMT's chairmanship election in an effort to stage a comeback.
His determination remains, but it may be difficult for him to create a sensation anymore.
From supporting Lee to opposing him, from following the political current to resisting it, from being a presidential candidate in 2000 to Lien's running-mate in 2004, and from striving for dominance of the pan-blue camp to interfering with the KMT's chairmanship election, Soong's circumstances have invariably gone from bad to worse.
His rise and fall have been the result of historical currents and have little to do with his talent.
Chen's rise to power coincided with the rise of Taiwan consciousness, so the currents of history worked to Chen's advantage.
Unfortunately, he has repeatedly misjudged the situation, and has valued tactics over strategies.
His popularity plummeted as he fell out with US President George W. Bush and became trapped by the legislature on one flank and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) on the other.
But the biggest change was caused by his poor handling of China's "Anti-Secession" Law. The law is considered regressive by most of the world, but from Beijing's point of view it had some practical advantages.
Although the law states that Beijing "shall employ non-peaceful means" if necessary, this is really nonsense, for war could break out irrespective of the law.
The legislation was basically meaningless, but it caused panic among Taiwan's political leaders.
This successfully resolved the pan-green camp's protest against the Chen-Soong meeting.
But it also provided the legitimacy for Lien's and Soong's Chinese trips, since they were cast as peace-making journeys in light of the unprecedented cross-strait crisis.
In fact, China has already paid a price for passing the regressive law. As for the practical aspects, it distracted attention away from tensions caused by its probing of the US-Japan defensive island chains. Beijing realizes that unification can hardly be achieved in a few days.
As a result, it has began to carry out a "united front" strategy to promote unification through commerce -- despite the international community's and Taiwan's condemnation.
Taiwan's public opinion thirsts for both the nation's self-awareness and peace.
During his trip, Soong made a concession on the "one China" issue and therefore contradicted Taiwan's mainstream opinion.
Lien also made a concession. But he did not yield to Beijing as much.
Chen has greater Taiwan awareness than either Lien and Soong. Originally, the public backed his approach: Chen's approval ratings were over 40 percent, and were double Lien's.
The Taiwanese people's protest against against China's hostility reached a climax during the massive street demonstration against the Anti-Secession Law in late March.
But while Chen was pleased with himself then, Lien was making plans to go to Beijing -- and Lien's trip remains deeply rooted in the minds of the public.
Within a few days of Lien's trip, an opinion survey conducted by the Cabinet's Mainland Affairs Council showed that the portion of Taiwanese people who believe that Chinese people are hostile to us reached a new low.
The public's support ratings for Chen and Lien also reversed, as Lien enjoyed more 50 percent of the public's support, while Chen only enjoyed around 20 percent of their support. This enormous change was hard to believe.
Soong's fall is not his fault. And Lien's rise is not due to his merits. They are booth rooted in the government's bungling of cross-strait relations.
This also gives China room to interfere with Taiwan's internal affairs and significantly damage the country.
In fact, because of the law's negative effects and the bad international reaction it sparked, Beijing was expected to express its goodwill anyway -- even if Lien had not visited China.
So Lien's rise came at the expense of the national interest. As for Chen, he may be standing on the right side of history -- but by valuing tactics over strategies, he has greatly disappointed us.
Lin Cho-shui is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry