As the dust finally settled around the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential nominations last month, the fight between President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has begun.
Polls conducted by media outlets on April 27, the day the nominations were officially announced, showed Tsai entering the race with an advantage over Ma. With Ma long struggling in the polls, many think Tsai stands a good chance of becoming Taiwan’s first female president.
The KMT government has committed a wide range of bureaucratic blunders and policy missteps that have been widely criticized. Ma’s management style has also been critiqued for being authoritarian and opaque. More importantly, despite persistent crowing about economic numbers, few Taiwanese have felt the economic recovery where it counts. Unemployment is still high and salaries remain stagnant. Ma’s cross-strait policy worries many who fear the repercussions of potential political negotiations with Beijing.
With these factors and Ma’s low popularity levels, Tsai could theoretically take the January poll.
However, the better question may not be whether Tsai can win, but is she capable of doing so?
Considered an “atypical” politician, the 55-year-old London School of Economics graduate has led the DPP to a string of successes since September 2009, when the party won a legislative by-election in Yunlin for its first electoral victory since Tsai became its leader. Her mellow temperament and practical approach has won over many moderates who were turned off by the nationalistic fear-mongering of former DPP president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Yet, personal appeal is not enough. Nor can the DPP rely on government blunders and economic hardship to drive voters into its fold. Ma’s policies may be worrying, but no one wants to relive the tensions of the Chen era. Indeed, one realistic analysis says that to win re-election, Ma needs only to minimize KMT mistakes and continue painting the DPP as a bunch of divided troublemakers bent on holding the nation hostage to a hopeless cross-strait policy.
Circumstances, therefore, will not decide the presidency; Tsai will have to earn it.
Above all, this requires that she and the party act decisively to limit vulnerability to KMT attacks. Thanks to former premier Su Tseng-chang’s (蘇貞昌) gracious concession after losing the DPP primary, the potential for party disunity has been blunted. Commentators have also played up the virtues of internal debate within the DPP as more democratic and less prone to error than the KMT’s top-down approach.
DPP inexperience in governing is also open to criticism and this will only increase now that political neophyte Tsai is the candidate. Here too, the party has moved to pre-empt attacks, including on Tsai’s thin political resume, with advocates pointing out that as a new face she carries little political baggage and that she has balanced her inexperience with a strong support staff. By instituting a “10-year policy platform,” Tsai has also sought to give the DPP greater breadth as a potential ruling party.
The need for a wider policy platform, however, infers the elephant in the room — Tsai’s China policy — which is her greatest liability given that her party identifies with Taiwan independence. This, more than anything, will determine her viability as a candidate.
Providing credible assurances that an elected DPP administration will not mean a return to Chen-era gridlock will also be Tsai’s greatest test of leadership. To accomplish this, she must convince voters that a DPP government will continue to advance relations with China. She must also persuade the deep-green elements within her party to hold their tongues on the sovereignty issue.
Accomplish these things and Tsai will earn the confidence she seeks.
Taiwan’s status in the world community is experiencing something really different; it’s being treated like a normal country. And not just a “normal” country, more like a valuable, constructive, democratic and generous country. This is not simply an artifact of Taiwan’s successes in combatting the novel coronavirus. It is a new attitude, weighing Taiwan’s democracy against China’s lack of it. Before I continue, I should apologize to the readers of the Taipei Times. I have not visited Taipei since the opening of the American Institute in Taiwan’s new chancery building in Neihu last year, so I was unprepared for the photograph
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
At a June 12 news conference held by the Talent Circulation Alliance to announce the release of its white paper for this year, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) emphasized that, in this era of globalization, Taiwan should focus on improving foreign language and digital abilities when cultivating talent, so that it stands out from global competitors. I suggest the government should consider building a professional translation industry. If the public believes that there is a relationship between learning English and national competitiveness, then the nation must consider the social cost of language education. This should be assessed to maximise educational effectiveness: Is
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a