Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has made a remarkable journey: Three years ago, after the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) defeat in both the legislative and presidential elections, she had the unenviable task of trying to get the party out of the doldrums. Today, after winning the primary to become the DPP’s presidential candidate, Tsai has already made history as the nation’s first female presidential candidate.
Next year, she has an excellent chance of beating the incumbent, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Her popularity has soared after winning the DPP presidential primary on April 27. Many opinion polls show that she is neck and neck with Ma. Some polls even show her edging ahead.
What are the reasons for this amazing turnaround?
For one, it is Tsai herself.
She has been low-key and unassuming, but at the same time has shown steely persistence in working the DPP back into the position of a viable opposition party. She has intelligently and systematically solved problems, and moved the DPP into a position where it can get broad support from the populace. She has been able to regain the trust and support of the party that was lost in the tumultuous days at the end of former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) administration.
Since becoming chairperson of the DPP, Tsai has brought many changes to the party. She proved that her soft, moderate approach was more effective with floating voters. She has broadened the power base of the DPP by attracting young voters.
She has also lifted political debate to a higher level with her soft-spoken style, and her rational and analytical approach to issues. Her leadership style is in stark contrast to that of Ma. Tsai has the ability to connect and reach out to grassroots supporters, while Ma is aloof and has never been able to shed his elitist image.
Ma himself also helped bring about a turnaround in the fortunes of the DPP. He came to office by touting an image of competence and experience, but this image suffered severely when his government seemed incapable of reacting adequately to Typhoon Morakot in August 2009, while a series of subsequent blunders further undermined the credibility of his administration.
However, Ma suffered his most significant loss of credibility through his most touted achievement: his China policy.
During the 2008 election campaign he had championed his close association with Taiwan and its future. He went down south for several “home-stays” and generally emphasized how he “belonged” to Taiwan.
However, after his inauguration, he started to travel a diametrically opposite course: that of enhancing relations with China. One agreement after another was penned, culminating in the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), which was presented as a panacea that would lift the nation out of its economic malaise.
While all this happened, a significant erosion took place on a number of fronts. Ma’s policies undermined Taiwan’s sovereignty, its democracy and its judicial system. Time and again, Ma focused narrowly on relations with China at the expense of basic freedoms.
Each time, Tsai was there to remind Ma — and the public — that Taiwan needs to stay true to the principles of freedom and democracy, that economic growth should not take place at the expense of workers, that relations with China are no substitute for Taiwan’s own space.
The road ahead will not be easy, as the entrenched KMT party machine will do whatever it can to twist the rules of the game and tilt the playing field so that it can retain power, but Taiwanese want change they can believe in.
Tsai is giving them a vision of the road ahead.
Chen Mei-chin is a commentator based in Washington.
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