One benefit to be gained from the recent allegations against President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is a growing public awareness on how to judge a political leader's character.
A comprehensive judgment of a political leader must take into account whether he or she can uphold national interests, set achievable goals and remain determined and consistent in executing ideas. He or she must have strong discipline, high moral standards and behave consistently.
If Chen failed to live up to high moral standards of leadership, at least he has set an example for other politicians by avoiding double standards and judging himself as well as others.
What Taiwan needs now is a stronger, unbiased, independent watchdog mechanism to monitor all politicians, especially those who might take power in 2008.
Among them, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's (
Also, when former Taitung County commissioner Wu Chun-li (吳俊立) was charged with bribery and his wife represented him in the election, Ma emphasized that Wu's wife "should not suffer for the crimes of her husband." But when first lady Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) was accused of receiving vouchers from the SOGO Department Store and her son-in-law was charged with insider trading, Ma insisted Chen take the blame.
When Chen's recall was first suggested by hawkish pan-blue figures, Ma remained cautious about such a move. As People First Party Chairman James Soong (
However, amid criticism that Ma has been controlled by Soong and the anti-Chen movement, he decided not to dance to Soong's tune and initiate a vote of no-confidence in the Cabinet right after Tuesday's recall vote.
Ma's political fence-sitting reminds us that he tried to manipulate the unification-independence issue earlier this year. After Chen announced he would consider abolishing the National Unification Council and guidelines in January, Ma adjusted his political stance by switching from unification as the eventual goal for Taiwan to embracing the idea of independence as an option.
With the aim of building a moderate image of himself, Ma used recent overseas trips to outline his cross-strait policy. However, most of his ideas either rehash other theories or existing policies adopted by the DPP government.
If Ma has problems with inconsistency and indecisiveness on key issues, what makes him different from Chen or Soong? Over-complacency and political opportunism have illustrated Ma's leadership weaknesses.
After the KMT's landslide victory in last December's three-in-one local elections, the morale of the pan-green camp was low and they were divided. Ma's over-complacent use of the national identity issue, however, resulted in a backlash from both the DPP and his own pan-blue alliance.
When Ma's camp tried to take advantage of his overrated popularity to score political points, he overlooked the deeply-rooted idea that the people of Taiwan have the right to a say in their own future.
When Ma attempted to assimilate light-green supporters by making independence one of the alternatives for Taiwan's future with China, he received a slap in the face from hard-core unification proponents.
A mirror has two faces. When Ma accuses Chen of not telling the truth and urges him to step down, he needs to remind himself that he is walking down the same path that Chen has trod.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS