Following an intense battle between the five candidates in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson elections, former premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) won by a landslide on Sunday with more than 50 percent of the vote. This is not the first time Su has led the DPP.
Although the DPP lost in the Jan. 14 presidential election, given its pretty strong performance and President President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) currently low popularity ratings, the party’s prospects are looking up and Su’s return to the spotlight will attract increasing attention.
Su’s political experience is second to none. He was a member of the Taiwan Provincial Assembly, a county commissioner twice, a legislator, DPP secretary-general, party chairman, secretary-general of the Presidential Office and also, of course, premier. While in those positions, Su produced results and he continues to be popular with the public. He is also politically astute and his return to the party leadership will make him even more powerful.
The joint attack on Su by the other candidates in the chairperson election was both ugly and unfair, but Su remained gracious and refused to rise to the bait. While this earned him considerable sympathy, it also means that his first task as party chair must be to unite the party internally. He must take solid steps to resolve intra-party tension to be able to lead the DPP forward.
Su is a man of integrity who is both strict and impartial and he possesses boundless energy. These are all good traits in a leader; but as party chairperson he will need to adopt a softer approach and learn how to compromise and communicate both within and outside the party. He will have to adjust his style to be able to unite the different factions and organize a team that will be able to bring the party back into government.
The most heavily criticized aspect of the chairpersonship vote was that the debates between candidates focused on personalities and the unification-independence issue. Very little time was spent discussing the policies that have been the target of so much public criticism, and this did nothing to create an image of a party that is ready to take over government.
Su will need to create a positive image for the party and have it conduct itself in a manner consistent with its status as the largest opposition party. The DPP cannot content itself with government-bashing. It has experience in government and Su has served as premier. Neither can it simply criticize the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) policies without offering viable alternatives.
Su needs to form a shadow Cabinet and to bring together academics, think tanks and senior party members who can formulate concrete social policies to compete with those of the KMT. This is how he can prepare his troops for the next election, and win the support of the public.
Former party chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) electoral defeat has caused the DPP to question whether it needs to amend its China policy. This area has been contentious ever since the party was formed and there has never really been consensus on what it should be, forcing Tsai to come up with a “Taiwan consensus” during her presidential campaign.
That campaign is now over. Su doesn’t have a lot of time to come up with a new stance on the issue of independence or unification. Consensus already exists on the 1999 Resolution on Taiwan’s Future (台灣前途決議文), and again, there is no rush to amend this. However, the party does need to adopt a more practical position vis-a-vis China, with a more flexible policy. It needs to do more research into the China question and not unquestioningly dismiss contact with China. This will show both the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party that the DPP has an important part to play in cross-strait relations.
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