The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has resorted to an old electoral tactic — playing up the “stability card.” Spending millions of dollars on TV and newspaper ads, including public endorsements by several tycoons, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is trying to scare voters, saying that if Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) wins, it would have a disastrous effect on the economy and cross-strait relations, while society would become unstable, because Tsai and the DPP reject the so-called “1992 consensus” — which Ma and the KMT claim to be the cornerstone of cross-strait dialogue and interaction for the past three-and-a-half years.
To counteract the KMT’s “scare” tactics, Tsai has stressed that “it’s the economy, stupid” and that “all politics are local.”
It is natural that both camps should focus their message on a single issue. For Ma, “four more years” is the main theme. For Tsai, “change” is the key word. However, for voters, perhaps the best way to gauge their choice is to consider why their ballots matter so much.
In 2008, 58 percent of voters cast their ballot for Ma and the KMT, giving them a majority in both the executive and legislative branches. The US supported Ma’s conciliatory approach toward China, while Ma pledged to take absolute responsibility for the KMT’s absolute governance. Had he done a good job, he could have boasted of his diverse achievements and demonstrated stronger confidence as he ran for re-election. Instead, he has been reduced to portraying a potential DPP comeback as a “destabilizing” influence on Taiwan’s economy and cross-strait relations.
What did he do wrong? It has a lot to do with his incompetence, his failure to listen to public opinion and his over-reliance on the relationship with China. Ma has been forced to rely on the “scare card” and continued bashing of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to try to win.
However, even if Ma were re-elected, he would likely become a “minority president” because of People First Party (PFP) presidential candidate James Soong’s (宋楚瑜) share of pan-blue votes. The number of KMT seats in the next legislature is expected to shrink to a “fragile majority.” Ma will be literally a lame-duck president and it would be easier for Beijing to pressure him into political talks.
Tsai has her weaknesses too. She has a limited political profile and administrative experience. She has been challenged for failing to present a more concrete China policy. Nevertheless, she has led the DPP back from its debilitating defeat in 2008 and prepared it to govern the country again, transforming it into a more moderate, rational, policy-oriented political force. Most importantly, if she wins, it would make her the first female president in Taiwan and East Asia. However, she will also face the dilemma of a divided government. Her proposals to push for a “grand coalition” and to generate a bipartisan “Taiwan consensus” on cross-strait relations face huge challenges.
For most foreigners, whether cross-strait dialogue and interaction can be maintained constitutes a major concern. For Taiwanese voters, whether they can improve their lot, find a decent job or better salary, see social justice in action and the wealth gap shrink are key to their decision.
Unlike past elections where the unification-independence debate dominated the agenda, Taiwanese politics has entered a new stage where voters judge national leaders based on their performance and leadership capabilities — not by the resources they pour into their campaign propaganda.
Perhaps it’s time for voters to calm down and consider a simple question: Are you better off than you were four years ago?
Liu Shih-chung is a senior research fellow at the Taipei-based Taiwan Brain Trust.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with