After four long years of angst and of hope that things might change, numerous Taiwanese are now having to live with the bitter taste of defeat. Deep down, some people feel a sense of trepidation for what the future holds, and are in need of emotional support.
Faced with her failed presidential bid, the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) announced that she would take responsibility for the outcome, saying it was time for her to stand down as party chairperson. We commend her courage in accepting responsibility, but we would ask her to reconsider the decision.
We offer the following reasons.
First, the odds of winning the election were always heavily stacked against Tsai and the DPP. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has access to prodigious amounts of party resources. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) also had the advantage of access to government resources as the incumbent, as well as the backing of Beijing, which attempted to influence the vote through economic intimidation. All of this conspired against Tsai, making her task all the more difficult.
Second, many examples of corruption were observed during the election. Twelve borough chiefs were accused of vote buying in Greater Kaohsiung’s Fongshan District (鳳山) alone, and another 12 community chiefs were suspected of doing the same in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Sanchong District (三重).
Third, the incumbent arranged it so that the elections happened to fall during the period when schools were holding their end-of-semester examinations and a week before the beginning of the Lunar New Year holiday. This decision affected first time voters and itinerant workers who would have needed to return home to vote.
Fourth, in the 2008 election, Ma and Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), received more than 7,658,000 votes, beating the DPP by more than 2,210,00 votes. However, under Tsai’s stewardship the DPP was able to close that gap by a considerable degree, receiving about 798,000 fewer votes than Ma. There were also gains in the number of legislative seats and the number of party votes received. So, there is some glory to be had, even in defeat.
Finally, the party’s chair is due to change hands mid-year, so it is even less desirable for Tsai to go before the pre-arranged handover.
It is widely acknowledged that Tsai has guided the party through some very precarious territory during the past four years. The DPP was truly fortunate to have had her at the helm. She has shown outstanding leadership qualities, being astute and wise, as well as demonstrating a natural amiability and warmth in combination with a willingness to accommodate all sides of an argument. The defeat is not only her loss, it is also Taiwan’s loss.
There remains so much to do in the wake of the election and the nation faces so many challenges. We implore Tsai to rethink her position to stand down.
[Editor’s note: Tsai Ing-wen tendered her resignation as DPP chairperson yesterday, which takes effect March 1.]
Reverend Kao Chun-ming (高俊明) is a Presbyterian pastor; Hwang Kun-hu (黃崑虎) is president of the Taiwan Friends Association; Cheng Cheng-yu (鄭正煜) is a former chairman of the Southern Taiwan Society; Wu Ting-ho (吳庭和) is a former director of the Taiwan Association of America; Cho Chun-ying (卓春英) is an associate professor at Chang Jung Christian University; Chien Chiao-tung (簡交通) is director of the Southern Taiwan Society; Chang Yeh-sen (張葉森) is chairman of the Taiwan Hakka Society.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
RSS