To alleviate concern that the legislative majority held by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) indicates a step backward for Taiwan's democracy, KMT vice presidential candidate Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) has cited Singapore, ruled by a party with an absolute majority.
Siew said Singapore is a worthwhile model. KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Singapore is not a democracy. The People's Action Party (PAP) has been the ruling party since 1957, before Singapore became independent. The PAP holds 91 of 94 seats in the Singaporean parliament, despite winning only 66.6 percent of the vote.
The government controls public discourse, partly through two major media groups, while the Internal Security Department can detain dissidents indefinitely.
The day after elections in 2006, for example, people who opposed the PAP were arrested.
The situation is much like that in Taiwan during the Martial Law era, when the government relied on emergency measures to stifle all forms of dissent.
The unity of party and state in Singapore is reflected in the business world. The PAP, through Temasek Holdings, which did not publish financial statements until 2004, controls key sectors: phone company SingTel, Singapore Airlines, the mass rapid transit system, the port, global shipping company Neptune Orient Lines, Singapore Power, the Keppel Group and Raffles Hotel.
Temasek Holdings owns nearly half the market's value on the Singapore stock exchange.
The Singaporean government also invests in foreign firms through the mysterious Government of Singapore Investment Corp, which never publishes financial statements and manages property worth more than US$100 billion.
The enormous benefits are exclusively for those at the top of the party and government tree.
It is also because of this unfair system that Singapore has the largest gap between rich and poor among developed nations.
The income ratio between the highest and lowest one-fifth of the population is 31.9, with a Gini coefficient of 0.522 in 2005, compared with Taiwan's ratio of about 6 with a Gini coefficient of 0.339 in 2006. The gap is therefore much larger in Singapore.
Human rights, freedom, democracy and equality are basic, universal human values -- yet these values are being suppressed in Singapore. Do Taiwanese need to make such a sacrifice?
The authoritarian regimes of former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀) and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍) share too many features with those of dictators Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) for Singapore to be worthy of such uncritical praise.
Tseng Wei-chen is a researcher in the Department of History at National Taiwan Normal University. Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS