The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) recently used its legislative majority to force through the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), thinking it would help increase its popularity ahead of the year-end special municipality elections.
However, the decision had the exact opposite effect. Almost 60 percent of voters are unhappy with President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) government and according to the latest figures from the Center for Prediction Markets, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) enjoys a big lead in Tainan and Kaohsiung. The KMT enjoys stable support in Taichung City, while the races for Taipei and Sinbei cities are too close to call.
In addition, the decision of DPP Kaohsiung County Commissioner Yang Chiu-hsing (楊秋興) to run as an independent, and of DPP Tainan Mayor Hsu Tain-tsair (許添財) to consider running in Greater Tainan, seem to have galvanized the pan-green camp, greatly increasing its chances of victory.
Simply put, it is hard to see what benefits the ECFA will bring Taiwan.
The Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics recently announced that the rich-poor gap stood at 6.34 times last year, and 8.22 times if social benefits and government transfers were excluded, an all-time high. Together with the high unemployment rate, frequent environmental mishaps and the fact that average citizens do not feel their quality of life is improving, this is a big blow to the government.
There is a South Korean saying that local elections make graveyards for ruling parties. This proved true in June when South Korea’s ruling Grand National Party did badly in local leadership elections. Similarly, in France, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s party lost to a left-wing alliance in local elections in March.
These examples show that local elections are not always local in nature, because voters often direct their complaints about such national issues as slow economic growth and unemployment toward whoever is in power at the time.
Recent legislative by-elections, the three-in-one elections and the Irrigation Association elections in May have all provided a clear indication of voter sentiment. For example, in the Feb. 27 legislative by-elections, the DPP won three out of four seats, as opposed to March last year, when former KMT legislator Kang Shih-ju (康世儒) was elected as an independent in a Miaoli legislative by-election, while the DPP’s Liu Chien-kuo (劉建國) won in Yunlin County.
In the three-in-one elections in December last year, the DPP won 50.96 percent of the vote and the KMT 47.88 percent. Of the 15 irrigation associations long controlled by the KMT, the DPP won control in Yilan, Taoyuan, Kaohsiung and Pingtung, for the first time ever. This will lead to changes in the balance of power across the country.
The KMT’s repeated unsuccessful attempts to play the ECFA card are evidence that its governance and promises to improve living standards have so far failed to convince the public.
However, the KMT shows no sign of re-evaluating its performance. Instead, it has once again resorted to bashing former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), using its legislative majority to amend the Act Governing Preferential Treatment for Retired Presidents and Vice Presidents (卸任總統副總統禮遇條例). Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and Ma have even had the temerity to interfere in an ongoing legal case after the Taipei High Administrative Court ordered the suspension of the Central Taiwan Science Park development.
There is little evidence that trumpeting the supposed benefits of the ECFA will prove to be a winning electoral strategy.
Lu I-ming is the former publisher and president of Taiwan’s Shin Sheng Daily News.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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