The legislative elections are only two months from now. Voters will choose their candidate, with the districts' needs first in their mind, but given the results of previous legislative elections, the nation's interests may be of greater importance to them.
Over the last eight years some good work has been done. But the list of problems recently named by the president is much greater. Another four years of this and Taiwan would be weakened probably beyond repair.
In the 1990s, the Legislative Yuan changed after changes were made to the Constitution. It gained wide authority in the development of democracy in Taiwan. It is time to change again. The numbers of seats will be halved, the effects of which are difficult to predict. The larger number of districts may well have some influence on the legislature.
In the past, the KMT held the majority, which made it much more knowledgeable in directing its elections -- as did its considerable assets. Times have changed, as have the people and the KMT's budget. That makes the outcome of the elections even more unpredictable.
If, after the next elections, the legislature is still controlled by one party, while the presidency is controlled by another, Taiwan's problems will continue and pressure for democratic change might increase.
If, on the other hand, the Legislative Yuan and the presidency are controlled by the same party, the nation will see either a continued fight to keep its sovereignty or a gradual move toward China.
The media is focusing on the presidential election, not the legislature. That is not unusual in democratic countries. Many countries have legislative and presidential elections at the same time.
Some do not have strong legislatures and focus little on their legislative elections. But considering how wide the differences between the two main parties are, the legislative election is clearly crucial.
The DPP and KMT have three months after the legislative election to campaign for the presidency. The DPP and KMT have party platforms, but neither of them has delivered an election platform. Reaching consensus within a party on an election platform is difficult in any democratic country. Given the strong differences between the nation's two main parties, the voters will need all the information they can get in the next two elections, which will have a clear impact on their future.
The DPP has an election disadvantage of having a lame duck president. Frank Hsieh (
Taiwan is also apparently suffering a lack of urgency in gathering and supporting candidates for the legislative districts. For the DPP, the legislative elections are especially key.
In the KMT, some surprising moves have caught media attention.
The party presented a draft mission statement without any mention of the "one China" policy or the "1992 consensus." Senior party leaders, including presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Media reports, however, claim that many KMT members are concerned that harping on unification is limiting public support for the party.
It makes it abundantly clear that the party hopes for unification with China.
Negative public reactions to this clearly indicate that voters disagree with the KMT's guiding principles.
As the presidential campaigning heats up, relatively little is being done to highlight the significance of the legislature. Both camps recognize that the public must agree on the nation's future, but few people are paying attention.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Workers’ rights groups on July 17 called on the Ministry of Labor to protect migrant fishers, days after CNN reported what it described as a “pattern of abuse” in Taiwan’s distant-water fishing industry. The report detailed the harrowing account of Indonesian migrant fisher Silwanus Tangkotta, who crushed his fingers in a metal door last year while aboard a Taiwanese fishing vessel. The captain reportedly refused to return to port for medical treatment, as they “hadn’t caught enough fish to justify the trip.” Tangkotta lost two fingers, and was fired and denied compensation upon returning to land. Another former migrant fisher, Adrian Dogdodo