As Taiwan’s presidential election approaches, few Taiwanese need to be reminded of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) infamous and miscalculated “6-3-3” pledge of 2008. With the election two months away and the “6-3-3” promise and others unfulfilled, Ma is crafting a new promise: He is promising a “golden decade.”
A golden decade? The full ramifications of this new promise boggle the mind, especially from a man who has consistently tried to make the public forget about his past unfulfilled promises by trading them for new unfulfilled promises.
Where does one begin? Let us start with the miscalculated “6-3-3” campaign pledge. The pledge was based on Taiwan’s 2007 GDP, which hovered between 5.5 percent and 5.7 percent, and Ma’s economic advisers felt 6 percent would be easily achievable during his first four years as president. When the economy started to tank, Ma reformulated the promise, saying he meant 6 percent by 2016, not 6 percent by 2012.
Is that achievable? This year’s GDP is about 4.7 percent and next year’s is predicted to be 4.5 percent — that hardly bodes well. And although the country has already wasted four years on Ma, he is now asking for another four-year term.
If the next four years prove as disastrous as the last, Ma will still be packed off with a comfortable pension in 2016. However, it will be a different story for Taiwan, and its problems will be more than just the economy.
Compare Ma’s promise of a “golden decade” to the unfulfilled promises above. If the first five years of “6-3-3” fall far short of the 5.7 percent GDP of 2007, then we can expect that the first five years of the “golden decade” will not be golden, but rather leaden dross. And Ma will be gone before the first half of that decade is over.
What about Ma’s other promises? Few recall that in 2005, as chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), Ma promised to divest the party of its ill-gained assets. That is another one to add to Ma’s dustbin of unfulfilled promises. And the profits from the few properties that Ma did sell were not turned over to the people; they were put in the KMT war chests to keep the party’s politicians in office. That is not divesting, but liquefying assets.
Then there was the famous 2005 promise to help arm the nation. After blocking arms budgets and purchases for three years in the Legislative Yuan so that the Democratic Progressive Party would not get credit for them, the Ma administration finally this year got approval from the US for a package of upgrades to the nation’s air force, but not the F-16C/Ds it had requested. Six years is a long time to wait to receive only upgrades in the end.
The past four years under Ma have been years of smoke and stagnation. Ma’s campaign team claims that of the 400 policies proposed by his administration in 2008, 90 percent have been fulfilled. That would make 360 fulfilled promises, but can anyone name even 25 of those?
Voters must ask themselves whether they are really better off now than they were four years ago because of those 360 promises that Ma has supposedly kept.
Is housing more affordable? Are jobs more plentiful? Have jobs stayed in Taiwan instead of going to China? Has the average person’s income increased or is it at a lower level than it was four years ago? Has the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) made a difference to anyone aside from a few rich people? Is the wealth gap shrinking or is it actually widening?
Smoke and stagnation.
And now also hiding in the smoke is Ma’s talk of possibly signing a peace treaty with China within 10 years. How can Ma make such a proposal when he will not even be in power in 10 years? Further, how does he envision this vague promise? It was first to be a treaty, then a peace accord — and now?
Then there is the additional ambiguity of whether Ma sees this accord as state-to-state, party-to-party or region-to-region and whether it must be under the “one China” principle that China always insists on. And will Ma invoke the fabricated and bogus so-called “1992 consensus”?
This is more than smoke and stagnation: It puts Taiwan’s sovereignty in danger. Ma has tried to escape from his own slippery conundrum by saying he would first seek a referendum.
However, Ma’s party has thus far not only refused to let the ECFA be put to a referendum, but has also blocked all attempts to reform the Referendum Act (公民投票法), with all its “birdcage” restrictions.
Ma began his presidency under the best of circumstances — with a Legislative Yuan in which his party controlled 75 percent of the vote.
After four years of smoke and stagnation, the people of Taiwan cannot afford to waste another four years.
Jerome Keating is a commentator based in Taiwan.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would