A lesson from Singapore?
As a Singaporean who has a strong affinity with Taiwan, I am deeply saddened by the direction in which the country seems to be heading since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) assumed office almost four years ago.
In my view, Ma’s gravest mistake, which could severely disrupt the social order in Taiwan if left unrectified, is to allow the influx of Chinese students and tourists into the country.
Singapore faced a similar problem in the mid-2000s — by allowing an uncontrolled inflow of foreigners into the city-state, which led to public unhappiness over several issues, including overcrowding on public transportation systems and rising property prices.
Sensing growing public anger over the competition from foreigners and new immigrants, the Singaporean government began to take steps to slow down the inflow of immigrants and foreign workers in 2009. The government also sharpened the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by giving more benefits to citizens in key areas, such as education.
It was a case of too little, too late, as voters displayed their unhappiness at the polls in May last year. For the first time in Singapore’s history, two ministers were voted out of office, while the opposition won 40 percent of the votes cast.
Post-election, the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) appointed a committee to review ministerial salaries — another issue that has angered many Singaporeans during the past two decades.
Recent political developments and changes in Singapore would not have been possible if voters did not push for these through their sacred votes.
In all likelihood, any political observer who compares the performance of the PAP in fulfilling its electoral promises with the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) campaign pledges would argue that the former has done much better in delivering on its promises.
To be fair to the PAP, it has served Singaporeans well and pretty fairly over the past few decades. That said, voters’ educational backgrounds today are different from those in the past and it is only to be expected that we have higher expectations of our political leaders today.
Ma embarked on a catchy and aggressive “6-3-3” campaign to woo voters four years ago. Indeed, he promised much, but delivered little.
Ma has failed to achieve an annual economic growth rate of 6 percent, an unemployment rate of less than 3 percent and per capita income of more than US$30,000.
Since these three areas are number-specific, the next-best course of action for Ma is to highlight other accomplishments that cannot be measured in numbers.
One of these, as he would like voters to believe, is cross-strait relations. However, I find it baffling that Ma can claim that cross-strait ties today are better than those during former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) era, especially since there are more Chinese missiles pointed at Taiwan today.
So what exactly has Ma achieved?
Is Taiwan now a more democratic country than it was during Chen’s administration?
I doubt it, given the number of smear attacks launched against Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in recent weeks.
Are Taiwanese better off today, in terms of wages and living conditions, compared with a few years ago?
Again, I doubt it.
I concur with Tsai, who says stability exists when “people wake up in the morning knowing that they have a job, have a house to live in when they get off work and can put food on the table.”
In many ways, the level of frustrations faced by Taiwanese today is similar to that of Singaporeans about eight months ago.
If Singapore’s example is any indication, it might just be time for Taiwanese voters to send a clear message to Ma and his party colleagues, who are contesting the presidential and legislative elections today.
Enough is enough, and I humbly believe only a change of government can reshape the destiny of Taiwanese, who gave Ma an excessively strong mandate in 2008 — only to be left terribly disappointed four years on.
The electorate’s decisions today will shape their country’s future for many decades to come, and as a keen and concerned observer of Taiwanese politics, I hope voters will turn out in full force and demonstrate through the ballot box the type of future they aspire to.
Jason Lee
Singapore
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.