Print

Mail

wiki links

Editorial: My party, right or wrong?

President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) would have us believe that allowing prosecutors to investigate the "state affairs fund" case somehow endangers Taiwan's security.

This belief is founded on Chen's assertion that allowing prosecutors access to documents that supposedly detail the administration's "secret" diplomatic efforts constitutes "leaking" information vital to national security.

There are so many levels of absurdity to this argument that even people normally sympathetic to the president can't help but feel that he is trying to hide something.

Still, perhaps the president is telling the truth. Perhaps letting a court of law learn how much money was spent on confetti and cookies for a state visit by the former vice deputy assistant junior undersecretary of sewers and drainage systems for the Republic of Boonieland constitutes a devastating blow to national security.

But probably not.

However, giving the public and the international community the impression that Chen is actively interfering with judicial processes does constitute a blow to Taiwan's image and democracy, and therefore acts against its long-term viability as a de facto independent state.

The security and stability of Taiwan's democratic system is of prime importance. The country's relations with its diplomatic allies serve a useful role, in that the few countries willing to stand by Taiwan augment its voice in the international community.

But the reason that people are willing to lend their ears to that voice is because of Taiwan's status as an advanced -- if young -- democracy in a region rife with authoritarian regimes.

There is no way for independent observers to judge if Chen is telling the truth when he tells us he and his wife are innocent and that they did not embezzle cash from the fund.

This is why it is important that the "state affairs fund" case be dealt with as openly as possible.

But as with so many other things in Taiwanese politics, the president's actions and the actions of his party in this instance are not driven by concern for the national interest. What motivates Chen and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is partisan loyalty, nothing more.

Taiwanese politics is now so poisonous that it seems moral relativism is the guiding principle. People have cut themselves adrift from any sense of what constitutes appropriate behavior.

In the realm of politics, few care who is right or wrong; or what is beneficial for the country and what is detrimental; or what is pragmatic and what is fantasy. The only thing that matters for all but a few is which "team" someone is on.

This is why politicians can one day praise an institution for its professionalism and independence (as the DPP did when courts tossed out the frivolous lawsuits over the 2004 presidential election), only to turn around and condemn the same institutions as partisan and biased (as the DPP did when prosecutors began investigating the first lady).

What the DPP had better hurry up and remember is that Chen will be gone someday, as will every politician who currently holds office. If the party stands for anything, as it says that it does in its charter, then it must think strategically.

As the Taiwanese slowly wake up to the reality that they have an identity separate from China, or even the "Republic of China," it will be vital for the country to have an established institutional framework within which to conduct a debate about the society's future.

This means separating party politics from governmental processes. It means giving the president his day in court as the law provides, whether he likes it or not.
This story has been viewed 2118 times.