After settling internal referendum disputes to ease the possible negative impact on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the KMT faces controversy again over "two-step voting," finding it difficult to counter criticism of hustling support for the party while in effect boycotting the referendum.
The true motivation behind the so-called "two-stage voting" can only be to hinder Taiwanese independence. The problem is, independence is already a mainstream idea. Is it wise to hinder independence by opposing a referendum with the election looming?
Prominent pan-blue commentators and academics insist that if the referendum is not opposed, pan-blue supporters could assume that the KMT has lost its ideals and stay away from the ballot box.
But do these academics believe their own theory? These pundits must understand that radicalism is not a brilliant strategy for gaining votes in a single area election, as countless mayoral elections have shown.
The decision to promote a losing strategy may stem from the KMT tradition of despising internal traitors more than enemies.
Ex-prisoners of Green Island often point out that KMT special agents were more cruel to Chinese communists than Taiwanese separatists, since the separatists were considered enemies and the communists traitors.
The KMT believes that supporting a referendum to join the UN under the name "Taiwan" and the DPP's independence proposal are essentially the same thing, and the possible outcome of either hardly matters. Even if the enemies were victorious, there remains a chance to strike back if the pan-blue front remained united. The real danger would be to allow traitors to gloat over their success.
More realistic pan-blue politicians may already be aware that radicalism creates a disadvantage. But even though the fundamentalist faction in the party is small, they are also the most enthusiastic supporters -- people the party cannot afford to offend.
Radical pan-blue supporters are most likely of the "one country, two systems" persuasion, though there are some who seek immediate reunification. The latter is only estimated at one percent of the general population, whereas the former -- according to surveys conducted by the Mainland Affairs Council -- rose to 16 percent following President Chen Shui-bian's (
Though 10 percent of the general population is insubstantial, it represents a hefty 20 percent of the pan-blue front. The majority of this group, while unlikely to want to remove traitors more than gain political power, is inclined to blindly trust their traditionally respected academic proposals than oppose a referendum that could win the election.
Under pressure from these individuals, the KMT is forced to insist upon "two-step voting," effectively undoing the benefits of a referendum in the first place.
The "two-stage voting" system is thus a strategy to boycott the referendum and a point of contention. While Wu Nai-teh (
The realization that "two-step voting" easily reveals the partisanship of voters is illustrated by anti-independent radicals gathering to threaten others at voting stations.
If radicals from both camps follow suit in the coming election, they could not only disrupt the public's freedom of choice but also possibly create violent conflict. Therefore it is better to follow the example of the US and adopt "one-stage voting."
Lin Cho-shui helped draft the Democratic Progressive Party's Taiwan Independence Clause.
Translated by Angela Hong
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.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past