Ethnic politics has driven the nation's political evolution for the past two decades and is likely to be a deciding factor in the upcoming presidential election.
The notion of "Taiwanese being their own master," or "letting Taiwanese decide their future," constitutes the main element of ethnic campaigns in the country.
The first manifestation of ethnic politics was the first direct presidential election in 1996, when Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), an ethnic Taiwanese, was elected. Lee skillfully borrowed from the opposition Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) handling of ethnic issues and attempted to transform the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) into a "Taiwanese" political party. Since then, except for those who hold extreme pro-unification views, almost every politician has tried to some extent to embrace the concept of "Taiwanese identity" as a way to win votes.
Even though Lee's attempt failed when the KMT lost the 2000 presidential race, the so-called "Taiwan-centered consciousness" has gradually taken root, particularly after the DPP became the ruling party.
Therefore, it is not surprising to see KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou's (
Ma's campaign strategy of riding a bike around the nation to experience "daily life in the country" by taking a so-called "long stay" was designed to strengthen his image of being truly Taiwanese and hopefully sway erstwhile DPP supporters.
Ma's campaign opens up a slew of interesting questions.
First, if the ethnic issue is not a problem as Ma insists, why would he need to spend so much time with everyday people?
Second, how accepting would Taiwanese voters -- or DPP voters for that matter -- of a non-ethnic Taiwanese president?
Third, can a "mainlander" like Ma -- who does not even speak fluent Taiwanese -- win enough support from light-green voters to win an election?
And finally, can Taiwanese voters select their next president without taking ethnicity into account?
These are the questions that have long dogged Ma's political career, although he says he has settled his own struggle with ethnic identity. It remains to be seen whether Ma is Taiwanese enough to win the election.
Ma finds himself walking a tightrope largely because he is not running purely as a representative of KMT supporters -- he also needs to win the backing of light-green and centrist voters. He faces the difficult task of needing to appeal to both of these groups while remaining true to himself and his party, which still advocates an ultimate unification with China.
Simply pretending to experience a day in the life of farmers and fishermen is not enough for Ma to win the hearts and minds of Taiwanese. It only shows Ma is still an outsider who does not speak the same language as voters outside Taipei.
Establishing a real connection with centrist voters entails more than just speaking Taiwanese and shaking hands with people in traditional markets -- it requires intimate exchanges of life experiences and thoughts. Such a connection requires long-time cultural interaction, rather than "short stay," cheap political stunts.
To effectively win over light-green voters, Ma has to prove the depth of his love for the nation and its people. He must prove that he is willing to make sacrifices for Taiwan. If Ma cannot safeguard the nation's sovereignty in the face of Beijing's diplomatic oppression, he is not qualified to become president. If Ma is only pretending to be interested in everyday people and the nation's sovereignty, he does not deserve to become president.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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 Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
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