At key points in history, there often appear brave heros who shape the course of the age. Former president Lee Teng-hui (
As part of the world's third wave of democratization, Taiwan is the best example of transformation from a Leninist-style regime to a democratic political system. The way that Lee used his determination and knack for understanding the situation to circuitously push through reforms from within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is worthy of study by politicians and business managers alike.
Lee was to the KMT what Japanese kendo is to taichi, in that his logic and responses were completely different. The KMT old guard were completely ignorant of kendo, and were therefore defenseless against Lee. By the time they realized he had struck, the battle was already over.
Lee used popular support as his backing. He manipulated the KMT factions until he had them where he wanted them, then broke the conservative factions one by one. He carefully dismantled martial law, pushed forward a pragmatic foreign policy, established a new political identity and turned Taiwan into a country for the Taiwanese, one step at a time. In skillfully redirecting Taiwan's politics onto another track, Lee was a bit like Turkey's Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who mixed the preference for reform over revolution with lightning-quick battle tactics.
The society, politics, economics and diplomatic relations of the Lee era were completely different from the situation faced by President Chen Shui-bian (
The father of Taiwan and the son of Taiwan have faced different challenges, worked with different resources and employed different policies. Just like the ages they governed in, the good points and shortcomings of their personalities and abilities also appear in striking contrast.
Lee is a deep thinker, a man of broad knowledge and a skillful strategist. He looked at the big picture, made his plans systematically and executed them in a timely manner.
However, Chen was trained as a lawyer and treats politics as if he were handling a legal case. He doesn't have the burden of ideology, but he also lacks Lee's sense of purpose and values. His penchant for practicality goes along with his short-term thinking. He doesn't have the haughtiness of an intellectual, but he also lacks a background in humanities and history.
He is like the small business owners who travel the world with a box of goods in search of buyers, who toil long hours and are resolute in the face of hardship, but who lack the ability to plan for the long term and don't have any experience working as part of a group.
Chen's political record has been disastrous, but the merits and flaws of his personality are the same as those of Taiwanese society. "The son of Taiwan" is an apt title.
Power is a fluid and mysterious thing, a combination of trust, respect and authority. But how one uses power is a more complex issue. Power, not matter how great, is useless to a person who lacks leadership skills.
Someone like Lee, who understands not only how to take power but also how to wield it, is truly worthy of being called the foremost person in Taiwanese history.
Antonio Chiang is a former deputy secretary general of the National Security Council.
Translated by Marc Langer
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
RSS