No sooner had the tally of the votes from all precincts in Taiwan's 2004 presidential election been completed than the pan-blue camp commenced its struggle to oust President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
The non-stop effort has since taken the form of perpetual obstructionism in the pan-blue-controlled Legislative Yuan, where the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and its allies pursue mindless partisanship to the detriment of the national interest. This has hurt the nation's defense, stymied economic development and harmed governmental efficiency. The obvious purpose of the pan-blue action has been to undermine Chen's government to the point of paralyzing it.
Interspersed with this unrelenting campaign have been flare-ups such as the recently failed recall attempt in the Legislative Yuan and the current sit-in headed by former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) to demand that Chen step down.
But the Taiwanese public's resentment towards the pan-blue camp's antics has also grown to such an extent that nothing short of Chen committing deeply offensive acts would persuade pan-green voters to acquiesce to his removal. To deep greens, using morality as the yardstick to measure the president's behavior simply reeks of double standards in light of the KMT's past actions.
The upshot is that deep-greens would never amicably allow Chen to be railroaded into an early retirement under current circumstances.
Meanwhile, the pan-blue camp's fixation on removing Chen before the expiration of his term persists, and so does frustration with it.
Therein lies the classic case of an unstoppable force coming up against an immovable wall and the impasse seems destined to continue.
Speeches Chen made recently may have shed some light on the conditions under which he would relinquish power of his own accord.
Chen ran through a litany of subjects he had promised pan-green voters before the most recent presidential election, including engineering a new Constitution that can survive in the current international environment and accomplishing a good measure of "transition justice." This catch-all phrase was coined to encompass the return of the KMT's ill-gotten party assets and the disposition of justice surrounding the myriad issues involved in the 228 incident, the subsequent White Terror and other remnants of the nation's former party-state.
The common thread linking these disparate undertakings is that they can only be accomplished with the cooperation of the KMT. Once these promises are fulfilled, pan-green voters' qualms about Chen's stepping down would be easily and rapidly deflated.
Furthermore, the political problems surrounding Chen stem mainly from institutional defects in the government that can only be cured through legislation. These defects include drafting a better law that would make removing a sitting president much less chaotic, laws that would restrict the power of the president to appoint officials and laws that would establish mechanisms to curtail graft by all government officials.
In summary, the KMT holds the key to expediting the early peaceful departure of Chen as well, strengthening Taiwan's democracy and at the same time ridding the party of its most notorious historical albatross.
Should this gap that sepa-rates the two sides of the political divide be bridged, every Taiwanese person would benefit.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS