It is clear that any political move by either of the two major political parties in Taiwan between now and early 2008 will be seen to have some kind of connection to the presidential election.
At this time, despite all the efforts to oust President Chen Shui-bian (
Inside the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), there is serious rivalry among key players to gain the party's backing for presidential candidate. There is also the continuing inability of the DPP to overcome the opposition's blockade of important legislation pending in the Legislative Yuan.
In addition there have been accusations that the president has not sufficiently controlled the Presidential Office, nor established a sound relationship with the media. But at the same time, there has been considerable improvement in Taiwan's democratic openness, giving the people of Taiwan a free lifestyle that is as good or better than in most democratic countries worldwide.
The party continues to maintain its objective that Taiwan is independent, that its name should be changed, and that a new national constitution be adopted, among other key policy issues. These hopes inevitably concern the US and China.
Though these policy goals are often repeated to bolster the DPP's core constituency and to remind the world of Taiwan's political situation, occasionally the party pushes the envelope. The issues raised are clearly in need of a dialogue between Taiwan, China and the US.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is in a period of internal change with results that are still uncertain. The party has had one overriding objective -- to regain power.
That is not unusual in any democratic country. The difference is this party has engaged in direct dialogue with the nation's principal adversary for domestic political advantage. The agenda has been enlarged by the KMT's legislative opposition to an important weapons procurement bill that is considered by many analysts to be crucial to the defense of the nation.
KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
While this is Ma's stated position, the party he controls does not seem to accept it without qualification. There is, for example, no desire within the party to change the nation's Constitution.
Many of the party's old habits, such as the infamous "black gold" politicking, an unhealthy penchant for Singapore-style authoritarianism and a lingering sense of attachment to China, though not spoken in public, are still part of the party's basic makeup.
What would each party do if they were to win the presidency? If the presidential election results in another split government, we are likely to see more of the same political deadlock we have witnessed over the last six years.
The KMT, with its larger pool of administrative talent to draw upon -- might bring some policy changes that will be supported by some, but will also be opposed by many.
But if the next president of Taiwan heads a unified government -- with the same party in power in the executive and legislative branches -- the impact on Taiwan will be substantial. There are countless possibilities.
A DPP president who can do much of what he or she wants could move in two directions. Such a president could move aggressively to gain support from abroad to establish Taiwan as a separate country. Or they could put more effort into developing a better relationship with China, but continue to refrain from accepting any political agreement that puts the nation under Chinese rule.
A KMT president with free rein could also move in two directions. In terms of economics, they could move closer to China, and at some point negotiate a political agreement with China of some form or another. Or they could hold off on a cross-strait agreement but reconstruct Taiwan's internal political system to along the lines of Singapore.
The two major countries relevant to Taiwan -- the US and China -- have huge domestic and bilateral problems of their own. The policies these two put in place once the 2008 presidential race is decided will be critical to Taiwan, and equally important to the rest of the East Asian region.
For this reason, in the current environment in which Taiwan's domestic politics is an uncomfortable mix of social disorder and democratic vibrancy, developing clearly defined rules of political engagement and media coverage is clearly needed.
As is done in democracies elsewhere, a group of well known and well regarded individuals who have no personal interest in the issues at hand should be asked to deliver a report to the people.
Seeking consensus this way is not new in Taiwan, and it can and should be done again for the sake of the nation's future.
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.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95