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.
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) challenges and ignores the international rules-based order by violating Taiwanese airspace using a high-flying drone: This incident is a multi-layered challenge, including a lawfare challenge against the First Island Chain, the US, and the world. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) defines lawfare as “controlling the enemy through the law or using the law to constrain the enemy.” Chen Yu-cheng (陳育正), an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of China Military Affairs Studies, at Taiwan’s Fu Hsing Kang College (National Defense University), argues the PLA uses lawfare to create a precedent and a new de facto legal
Chile has elected a new government that has the opportunity to take a fresh look at some key aspects of foreign economic policy, mainly a greater focus on Asia, including Taiwan. Still, in the great scheme of things, Chile is a small nation in Latin America, compared with giants such as Brazil and Mexico, or other major markets such as Colombia and Argentina. So why should Taiwan pay much attention to the new administration? Because the victory of Chilean president-elect Jose Antonio Kast, a right-of-center politician, can be seen as confirming that the continent is undergoing one of its periodic political shifts,
Taiwan’s long-term care system has fallen into a structural paradox. Staffing shortages have led to a situation in which almost 20 percent of the about 110,000 beds in the care system are vacant, but new patient admissions remain closed. Although the government’s “Long-term Care 3.0” program has increased subsidies and sought to integrate medical and elderly care systems, strict staff-to-patient ratios, a narrow labor pipeline and rising inflation-driven costs have left many small to medium-sized care centers struggling. With nearly 20,000 beds forced to remain empty as a consequence, the issue is not isolated management failures, but a far more