After President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) failed to deliver on his “6-3-3” campaign promise — 6 percent economic growth, per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate of below 3 percent — it is common knowledge that his election promises are worthless.
To everyone’s surprise, when a journalist asked Ma about the results of his “4-6-8” plan not long ago, he couldn’t even remember the name of the plan and said he would have to check. Clearly he did not remember promising during his 2008 election campaign to provide tax refunds of up to NT$46,800 as a job subsidy for low-income households with incomes.
The campaign promises a popularly elected president makes represent a solemn pledge to voters. However, Ma not only makes little effort to fulfil his promises, he often ignores them altogether.
One example is the signing of the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the opaqueness of which raised a lot of questions, resulting in demands for a referendum on the issue. However, Ma blocked such proposals and would not even allow KMT legislators to review the agreement, despite its huge legislative majority.
Other campaign promises that Ma does not really care about, such as the “4-6-8” plan, he conveniently forgot after winning the election. During the 2008 campaign he promised that the government would continue to seek UN membership, in line with the wishes of Taiwanese. After becoming president, that promise was forgotten as attempts to gain UN membership as a state were replaced by a push for a “diplomatic truce” with China.
Ma pledged that Taiwan’s future would be decided by Taiwanese without any interference from China, but after coming to power he has pushed the “1992 consensus” with Beijing and said that Taiwan is part of China, thus depriving the Taiwanese of their right to decide.
When running for party chairman and president, Ma repeatedly said he would resolve the problem of the KMT’s ill-gotten assets. However, he has simply sold off the party’s assets cheaply in one questionable deal after another that even members of the Central Standing Committee were not told about. Recently exposed kickbacks paid in connection to these sales have further highlighted Ma’s deception. The only thing about which he seems to be genuinely sincere is his belief in the “one China” principle and his efforts to lock Taiwan onto China in pursuit of “eventual unification.”
As he campaigns for re--election, Ma is now making another set of promises. Who can believe anything he says? More than a month ago, his campaign spokesman Yin Wei (殷瑋) was unable to name the “12 Loving Taiwan Projects” that Ma proposed on a TV talk show. It has long been thought that Ma’s assistants don’t take his promises seriously, but the “4-6-8” debacle shows that not even Ma himself takes them seriously
Do the pan-blue camp’s heavyweights continue to support him for the sake of KMT rule? Do deceived swing voters want to be deceived again? Above all, first-time voters should not trust his campaign promises, which are even bigger this time around.
Despite failing to deliver on the “6-3-3” pledge, Ma is undeterred in his promises.
He continues to equivocate over a pledge to donate half his salary if he fails to deliver on the original promise. Presidential Office spokesman Fan Chiang Tai-chi (范姜泰基) said on Oct. 4 that Ma had donated more than NT$70 million to charity over the years.
This excuse only serves to further highlight Ma’s ignorance about political accountability. He has said that what is important is that he continues to strive to achieve his election promises, rather than whether he donates half his salary.
Despite failing to fulfill his promises, Ma is now asking the public to give him four more years in office, offering an even more grandiose promise of a “golden decade.”
Perhaps he should declare martial law — that way he could take responsibility for the failure of the “6-3-3” pledge by remaining president indefinitely.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past