If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wishes to win the presidential election next year, it should nominate former premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) for president.
First, Su is the DPP’s most outstandingly successful electoral politician. In 1989, he won the county commissionership in Pingtung County and was twice elected as Taipei County commissioner, in 1997 and 2001. Su was also elected twice as a provincial assemblyman and in 1995 as a legislator.
Even in his failed campaign for Taipei City mayor last year, Su obtained the second highest percentage of the vote ever obtained by a DPP candidate in Taiwan’s capital, where the DPP has never won an absolute majority of the votes.
PROVEN ADMINISTRATOR
Second, Su is a proven administrator. His re-election in 2001 as Taipei County commissioner demonstrated that the voters in Taiwan’s most populous and most complex local administrative unit approved of his administrative and political skills. Taiwanese as well as foreign observers of Taiwan’s government agree that he was undoubtedly the most successful of the five premiers under former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Thus, Su has by far the most successful administrative experience in large-scale governmental organizations, where most observers comment favorably about the excellence of his leadership and skill.
Third, as many as one-fifth to one-fourth of Taiwan’s voters are swing voters. This means that a very large proportion of the electorate choose their candidate on the basis of the candidate him/herself and the candidate’s platform, rather than their party.
This is one reason the DPP, which won over 50 percent of the presidential vote in 2004, slumped to less than 42 percent in 2008.
Many people who had voted twice for Chen voted for Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2008. And, they said, if Ma did not do a good job, they would vote DPP in the next election.
WIDE SUPPORT
Both public and private polls show that Su is both the strongest challenger to Ma and the one DPP candidate who can definitely defeat Ma. This is because Su appeals to swing voters. To win the presidency, a candidate in Taiwan must win the support of swing voters. Without this essential part of the electorate, a candidate will lose.
Fourth, Su appeals across both gender and generation lines. He has support among men and women as well as among young and old.
He also has support across all educational backgrounds and in all geographic areas of Taiwan.
His interest in and promotion of a wide variety of Taiwanese popular music, for example, has won strong support among the young.
KNOWLEDGEABLE
Fifth, Su has demonstrated a clear perception of problems as well as strategic analytical abilities in dealing with domestic politics and foreign relations. He is extraordinarily knowledgeable in international affairs. I know that several foreign correspondents, in addition to this writer, have been very impressed after extended interviews.
Su came into politics as a lawyer for the defendants in the Kaohsiung Incident trial of 1980. In 1986, he became a co-founder of the DPP and since then has made many contributions to both Taiwan and the DPP.
If the DPP wishes to win next year’s presidential election, it should nominate Su Tseng-chang.
Bruce Jacobs is a professor of Asian languages and studies and director of the Taiwan Research Unit at Monash University in Australia.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS