These days, Taiwanese media spend almost all of their energy on producing stories about the need for President Chen Shui-bian (
The opposition has failed to have Chen legally recalled and now is turning to political means. The difference in the present effort is that it is being made by non-governmental organizations and individuals, based primarily on information that has not been proven.
Nonetheless, it has generated a large number of supporters, mostly pan-blue of course, but also some intellectuals and dissatisfied pan-green followers. However, increasingly we now see more of the intellectuals, some of whom were originally gung-ho with their anti-Chen rhetoric, questioning the wisdom of bringing Chen down.
They are beginning to write about the need to strengthen democracy, irrespective of which individuals hold office. Some are even pondering the worth of spending so much time and effort on a task that will be rendered pointless in 19 months from now.
One might think that this effort is meant to keep the governing party on the back foot, giving the opposition the time and political capital to prepare for the legislative elections at the end of next year, and the presidential election soon after. If the goal is to keep the governing party occupied, then the opposition is doing well.
They are already working on the difficult task of deciding who among their ranks will be chosen to run for their party and how to rid themselves of black gold and stolen assets. They have pretty much chosen their candidate for the presidential election.
They will have the help of what is called the "mainstream media" -- that is, supporters of the pan-blue camp. The discipline of the media has vanished as the standard and objectivity of articles in the newspapers and TV talk shows seems to have collapsed.
One recent example: a charge that claimed foreign workers had been treated badly and underpaid by their employer. Among the company executives who were charged was a well-known political figure, and they were totally cleared by the judiciary. Very little of this information was mentioned in the media, however.
Over the last six years, badly needed laws and governmental reforms have been held up by the opposition.
To move forward, the government will have to take an almost completely new approach to its job. During these 19 months before the presidential election, there will be uncertainties about personnel in both the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The most likely presidential candidate for the latter is very likely going to be Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
There are also differences on important issues within the KMT that need to be resolved. In the DPP, the priority is to handle the campaign to remove Chen while maintaining the integrity of the office of the president. The question of who will be the DPP's presidential candidate is secondary and still unclear.
Beyond that, the differences within the party on many fundamental issues will be difficult to resolve. Nineteen months may seem a long time to resolve these issues, but there is much to do in preparation for the presidential election.
Whichever party wins will be able to establish the laws needed to pursue their domestic objectives. How that will be done with the policy differences that exist within Taiwan, and with the interests of both the US and China taken into account, is difficult to say.
The year 2000 saw Taiwan's first democratic change in governing parties and major adjustments were necessary.
Inevitably, the winner and the loser had little experience in either ruling a country, or being in opposition. If the present parties continue as now after 2008, there will likely be changes, but not as we have witnessed over the last six years.
There would likely be more effort to develop better communication and reconciliation with each other.
If the result is still a split government, but turned on its head with the legislature having a DPP majority, and the president coming from the KMT, then the differences will remain more like the present. But if the next two elections see the legislature and the Executive Yuan controlled by the same party, then changes will be a far more intense matter for both sides of politics.
For the two most important countries for Taiwan, the US and China, there will be much uncertainty. The uncertainty for China will be the greatest. Even if the KMT wins -- which most people believe is best for China -- to what extent that party will be able to pursue its objectives is questionable, as a large part of the population is not supportive of the KMT's platform.
Further, even if the KMT's objective of a closer relationship with China is fulfilled, this is far short of what Beijing wants. If on the other hand, the DPP can win both the legislature and the presidency, China may have the difficult task of developing a policy that will not overly challenge the US.
For the US, the hope is for a KMT that will not move too close to China, or a DPP that can develop a better relationship with China. The US will likely continue its present policies.
The key question will be whether the US can have a more effective dialogue with a Taiwan that remains an important partner in a growing region. There are crucial changes ahead that could determine the future of Taiwan's democracy and its national identity.
The people of Taiwan will make that decision. But what they now seem to be doing is accepting a step toward a different kind of democracy, and that is only 19 months ahead.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and is now a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS