Following the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) overwhelming victory over the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in the recent county and municipal elections, some of the international media predicted that the KMT would succeed in forcing their pro-unification agenda through both the legislative and the executive branches of the government.
But the election results far more likely reflected a myriad of local factors, rather than voters' rejection of Taiwan's continuing democratization. In other words, the result may have signaled widespread dissatisfaction with the conduct of the messengers, but hardly of the message of democratization itself.
Still, this clarification mitigates neither the burden of a resounding defeat on the DPP, nor the crisis the defeat entails.
In reality, one of the first consequences of the elections was a clarion call from the public for top-to-bottom reform of the DPP. This was accompanied by a chorus of demands to further "deregulate" cross-strait relations.
There is no doubt that the DPP needs reform. After all, a political party's primary function is to perform well in elections. Every time there is a colossal failure, reform is a must.
Nevertheless, it is reasonable to question whether a party, with a leadership prone to factional squabbles is capable of truly transforming itself, without having the efforts disintegrate into endless recriminations, further aggravating the crisis.
Alternatively, perhaps a team of outside experts should be assembled to look into the existing structures and come up with recommendations for changes. One of the important questions that begs for an answer is how to remain competitive in local politics without emulating the KMT's culture of corruption.
Regarding cross-strait relations, what the KMT is offering focuses on short-term benefits, at the expense of Taiwan's long-term interests. Still, the KMT's message of an illusionary "peace and prosperity" has found a receptive audience among Taiwanese who are willing to temporarily cast aside their reservations about the KMT's past and present transgressions.
Conversely, given that the DPP is taking the long-term view of Taiwan's national security which in turn guarantees Taiwan's continuing democratization, the DPP's approach to cross-strait affairs often imposes on the public various degrees of short-term sacrifice -- be it time or profit.
Therefore, unless politicians and government officials from the DPP conduct themselves with a similar spirit of self-sacrifice, the DPP's message on cross-strait issues will go nowhere.
In other words, it serves little purpose for the pan-green camp to bemoan the general public's lack of farsightedness, or their collective amnesia about the KMT's 50-year abuse of power in Taiwan.
It is not surprising that the Taiwanese people would hold DPP politicians to a high standard, with a squeaky-clean record a minimum requirement.
All of this might also partially explain why so many people, including some within the DPP, are in favor of removing "burdensome" regulations. Yet, further deregulation is the wrong medicine for the DPP.
For one thing, the enhancement of the nation's long-term interests is the DPP's raison d'etre. If deregulation is found to be detrimental to those interests, it should be curtailed instead of being expanded.
Moreover, from a practical point of view, further deregulation will erode the DPP's hard-core support base, which is apparently willing to overlook the DPP's shortcomings as long as it is upholds its core values.
Conversely, given that President Chen Shui-bian (
Viewing these latest elections from a broader perspective, the pan-green camp should be able to take some comfort in the fact that it still garnered 42 percent of the votes even under "perfect storm" conditions for the KMT. The next major elections are two years away. And two years is an eternity given Taiwan's fickle voter sentiment.
The DPP should just shape up and stay the course.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of