One of the key characteristics of Taiwan's shallow-dished political circus and headline-driven media culture is a tendency to search for the next hot issue without seriously taking social dynamics and the public interest into account.
As the governing party, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is standing at a critical juncture in terms of selecting its next presidential candidate. The wrap up of registration for the primary last week has officially opened up the post-Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) era.
This era is significant, but not just because of Chen's attempt to set the tone early this month for all contenders by emphasizing the "four wants and one no" -- namely Taiwan wants independence, name rectification, a new constitution and new development, but no political split.
What makes the primary so important is that the DPP presidential candidate must introduce a new vision for all Taiwanese.
Regretfully, as the primary race begins, the four competitors -- Vice President Annette Lu (
To take advantage of internal power struggles in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), Chen has proposed using a public poll to decide the DPP's best joint presidential ticket. The idea was tentatively accepted by Su and Hsieh -- who have outperformed Lu and Yu in terms of popularity.
However, Lu and Yu seem to favor the current rules of the game, that is, a combination of a direct vote among registered party members and a public poll.
Prior coordination by Chen might effectively minimize an internal spit, but it might also create a negative image of "back-door politics." Only through public debates will voters be able to understand each candidate's vision for leading the country.
Unlike the old KMT's or even the Chinese Communist Party's long tradition of "designated successors," it is impossible for Chen to endorse a successor. In this regard, the assumption that Chen can serve as a mediator among the four competitors within the DPP lacks both theoretical and democratic value.
The DPP is well-known for its pluralist, free and democratic approach to internal competition and decisionmaking. One of the party's most valuable assets lies in its democratic and open rules of competition. Any contender must win the primary to earn the candidacy, and the loser must accept the results of the primary.
Instead of worrying about former KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou's (
Taiwanese voters are now better informed and more independent of politics. The nation's next leader will have to judge when to run up the flag and charge, or to mediate differences and seek to shift consensus by stages in the face of both internal and external challenges.
Whoever represents the DPP in the presidential election next year, he or she will have to win public support not only by incorporating negotiation and persuasion into political maneuvering, but also by being more pragmatic in fulfilling the nation's urgent need to put aside partisan dispute and uphold public interests.
Only by directly facing the nation can all four DPP competitors win support from the rank-and-file by clearly telling voters why they can do better than Chen when it comes to the questions of safeguarding Taiwan's sovereignty, forging a balanced cross-strait policy, strengthening the nation's self-defense, promoting sustainable economic prosperity and bringing about social justice and clean politics.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US