An editorial in the Chinese-language daily China Times a few days ago pushing for dialogue between President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) made me think. As the editorial pointed out, a lot of people have started to discuss whether the two will meet after both have behaved so courteously toward one other: Ma by being quick to congratulate Su on his election as DPP chairperson and Su by making it clear that he is not averse to meeting with Ma. The newspaper backed its editorial with a poll showing that 66 percent of respondents would look favorably on them meeting.
Ma is the sitting president and chairman of the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Su is the chairman of the largest opposition party and a possible candidate for the next presidential election. Given the current domestic political and economic chaos and surging public discontent, both the KMT and the DPP should give up their party biases. The former should abandon its arrogance and deal with issues in a humble and responsible manner, while the latter should stop acting as if it is taking pleasure in the current national difficulties because “the worse the national situation is, the better it is for us.” They need to instead think about what the public needs. This is the attitude that responsible political leaders from both parties should adopt.
However, such a meeting would only be the first step toward resolving the deadlock between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. To be more exact, now is the time to hold a national affairs conference. This is the only way Ma and Su will be able to live up to public expectations.
Ma and his administration should, publicly and impartially, seek out the sources of public dissatisfaction, find out what the people want and then make this the foundation of a national affairs conference. A national affairs conference should discuss a wide scope of issues that concern the public, such as: legislative and judicial reform, distribution of fiscal resources price stability, land-use planning and so on.
Calling a meeting between Ma and Su and a national affairs conference of course does not mean that every single issue will be resolved. The main goal of these moves would be to open the channels of communication and determine the most pertinent issues affecting the nation and their possible solutions. A democratic government must endeavour to gain an understanding of public hardship, listen to public opinion and find ways to allow the public to express their opinions to the government. Also, in this way Ma would not have to stay on top of every single issue. Things could be delegated so that different levels of government remain in charge of their respective issues. This would improve government efficiency.
Holding a national affairs conference could also set a democratic precedent and establish a “fire lane” for the government to access suggestions from various sectors of society when policy sets off a public confidence crisis. This mechanism would remove biases and put an end to the illusion that decisions are made solely by the elite. Being able to choose between several suggestions would remove obstacles to policy implementation and would also offer a way to spread decisionmaking risks. The DPP would be able to use this to gain an understanding of the positions of different factions and individuals on government policy. Ideas gathered in this manner could be used as a reference if the party returns to power, thus avoiding framing Taiwan’s future in terms of the DPP’s existing ideology.
In South Africa, for example, after the apartheid government handed over the reins to Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress, Mandela appointed his presidential predecessor, F.W. de Klerk, as his vice president, thus making progress in resolving racial confrontation. If it could be done in South Africa, then why not in Taiwan?
When former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) first took office, the domestic and international situation was not much better than it is now. Lee called a national affairs conference to solicit suggestions from all sectors of society. In doing so, he managed to consolidate an effective consensus between the government and the opposition and to turn the crisis into an opportunity for change.
Looking back at the past 10 to 15 years makes it clear that the infighting between the pan-blue and pan-green camps has seriously hurt the nation. The public is hugely disappointed with the fact that Taiwan is now lagging far behind South Korea, its fellow Asian Tiger. The pan-blue and pan-green camps should place the interests of the nation and the public above their narrow party interests. A meeting between Ma and Su would be a good first step toward achieving this goal. However, to be able to really work together to build a vision for the country’s future, it would be necessary to follow up with a national affairs conference.
Shu Chin-chiang is a senior consultant to the National Policy Foundation and president of the Foundation of Taiwanese Culture.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US