The year-end county commissioner elections should primarily be a rivalry between the two largest political parties, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). But, recently, the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) has nominated its own candidates.
The TSU is not seeking to win at the polls, but rather aims to prove to the DPP that it still exists and should not be ignored. This will give it room to bargain with the DPP, and also serve as preparation for the legislative elections in 2007, where it risks being obliterated by the "single-member district" legislative electoral system that will come into effect at that time.
Lee Hsien-jen (
He suggested that the TSU might want to alter its tactics, since the party would eventually have to deal with China rather than isolate itself from cross-strait exchanges.
I believe that the prospect of the "single-member district" system is forcing the TSU to become more moderate, as the system will be slanted against more radical candidates, but I wonder whether this is the right way for the TSU to escape from its current predicament.
The TSU has an interesting history. It was founded by former president Lee Teng-hui (
By drawing off KMT members of the localization faction, it was intended to weaken the KMT and help the DPP. Its stance on Taiwan's independence was between that of the DPP and the KMT, in other words, it was originally less radical than the DPP.
The establishment of the party coincided with the announcement of President Chen Shui-bian's (
As a result, the DPP was losing appeal, and faced combined pressure from the failure of its new "middle road" and its indifferent administrative record.
In the run up to last year's presidential elections, the TSU was able to come to its aid with its "Alliance to Campaign for the Rectification of the Name of Taiwan," and the "228 Hand-in-Hand Rally" and other campaigns to promote Taiwanese consciousness, helping to avert a DPP defeat.
From the perspective of its history, we can see that the TSU is faced with a dilemma. If it waters down its independence platform, it will lose its appeal, but if it becomes more radical, it will outpace many of its supporters.
But whatever the circumstance, to weaken its pro-independence position as a means of winning votes is unrealistic. For a small party like the TSU, to water down its platform will simply make its grassroots supporters wonder what distinguishes it from the DPP, which it would be more advantageous to support.
For those who have always supported the DPP, they will feel that, as the TSU has admitted it was mistaken, their decision not to shift their support to the TSU was the right decision.
In fact, we can cay that the TSU made the same mistake that Chen did when he announced his new "middle road" as a ploy to appeal to appeal to the mainstream public in Taipei.
In the end, not only will the TSU fail to win more support, but could endanger its own existence. Some of its members may transfer their support to a more radical party, as former DPP members transferred to the TSU, and though the probability is not as high, it is still a possibility.
It will be difficult for the TSU to deal with the threat posed by the "single-member district," but its current strategies are misguided. We will have to see what they can do to escape this predicament while keeping their ideals intact.
Lin Cho-shui is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY LIN YA-TI
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
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
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
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