It is never easy to govern. An election campaign is about black and white, but governing is more about gray. In a true democracy, it is often a tough job for a popularly elected leader to strike a balance between motivating supporters and dictating policy.
Good leadership is more about the power to persuade and bargain than the power to dictate and manipulate. Unfortunately, this is exactly the problem facing Taiwan’s government today.
Recent controversy over whether President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should singlehandedly negotiate and sign a comprehensive economic and cooperation agreement (CECA) with his Chinese counterpart was another manifestation of how Ma disregards public concerns and legislative oversight.
Under tremendous domestic pressure, Ma was forced to use the less concrete term “economic cooperation framework agreement” (ECFA). Nevertheless, Ma continues to insist that his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government should strike a deal with China without the legislature first needing to give the agreement a green light.
Why is this? The legislature is controlled by the KMT, which enjoys an absolute majority. It is hard to see how a KMT-dominated legislature would override Ma’s hoped-for agreement with Beijing.
In addition to opposition from the Democratic Progressive Party and some civic associations, most people have no idea what a CECA or an ECFA means, nor do they know what benefits that the latter would bring to an economy in decline. This constitutes Ma’s biggest leadership challenge.
Ma and the KMT have attributed the recession to the global financial crisis. But if Ma had not raised expectations during his election campaign that he would achieve a growth rate of 6 percent, increase per capita income to US$30,000 and lower the unemployment rate to 3 percent, then people would not have been so frustrated and regretful over voting an incapable man into office.
Ma must stop basking in the 58 percent support he garnered in the presidential election and recognize the rapid erosion of his popularity. Most importantly, he needs to adopt a more humble and more convincing strategy to rebuild public trust. In doing this, the power to negotiate with the opposition and communicate with the public is key.
Even with the KMT controlling the executive and the legislature by a wide margin, Ma must make a greater effort at reconciliation to bridge social divisions and establish a domestic consensus on this controversial policy.
Space for negotiation determines whether Ma should be aggressive or conciliatory in promoting policy. Should he lash out boldly with a new approach and a new stance, or focus instead on incremental change? Is it time to run up the flag and charge, or to mediate differences and seek to move toward a consensus by stages?
In this case, Ma has fast-tracked his cross-strait policy since taking office, showing nothing but arrogance and disrespect for the opposition and the public.
The four agreements on cross-strait opening reached by the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party last December were never debated in the legislature — before or since.
Ma’s choice of media interviews to elaborate on his ideas was also misplaced. These interviews and reports, especially in Taiwan, were too often elitist and one-sided.
Fundamentally, what Ma needs to do is explain the reasons behind these bold initiatives to the rank and file — face to face. But because he has had difficulty elaborating on his policy in the Hoklo language (commonly known as Taiwanese), Ma has probably decided to bypass public discussion — in contrast to his Hoklo-speaking performances during his election campaign.
Given that the economy won’t be back on track for at least two years, Ma needs to come up with immediate results with his cross-strait policy to bolster his re-election bid.
The paradox is that cross-strait relations cannot be conducted in such a rushed and unresponsive manner.
Ma should at least look to US President Barack Obama. Since taking office, Obama has made use of a national craving for reconciliation between political parties and for economic rejuvenation by launching a series of reform initiatives.
Unlike Ma, Obama is selling his agenda through a combination of persuasion and bargaining.
Obama has not only displayed analytical skills in identifying a solution to the US’ problems, but has also applied effective managerial leadership to narrow down competing views on his bold initiatives. Thus far, no “rookie president” syndrome has emerged to damage his high approval rating.
Ma should rely on motivational rather than dictatorial behavior as he attempts to build domestic support. When it comes to bold initiatives, leaving voters behind is not an act of leadership, but of arrogance.
Liu Shih-chung is a visiting fellow in the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS