A report on TV Tokyo said the focus of today’s presidential election would be Taiwan’s distance from China. The report said that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has maintained close relations with China during his presidency, allowing Chinese investment in Taiwan and increasing numbers of Taiwanese visitors. Economically, it said salaries are low and are not expected to increase, and this is directly and closely related to Taiwan’s relationship with China.
A Bloomberg forecast said that Taiwan has suffered from China’s drop in exports and there is a 50 percent chance that GDP will drop for two consecutive quarters this year. There is a risk that Taiwan will join the recession club. Anyone who believed Ma’s promise eight years ago that he could fix these problems if elected president might not be too happy.
Some international media are following the nation’s elections and economic forecast. Many reports make the same point: Ma is maintaining close relations with China and Taiwan has become increasingly linked to China on his watch. This has not brought any benefits to Taiwan and people are increasingly worse off.
Ma’s “6-3-3” campaign pledge in 2008 — 6 percent economic growth, yearly per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate of less than 3 percent — better links to China and “upgrading” Taiwan were wicked lies intended to deceive. Despite this, Ma points to official data to brag about his achievements, saying that he has done better than his predecessor and that the public should be happy.
If that really were the case, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could win these elections without even trying, but the opposite is true. Ma is wrong about his party and he is wrong about himself. Neither has a grasp on fundamentals, and the party’s support base is shrinking by the day.
Looking at the election campaign so far, the winners and losers have more or less been decided, and it seems people have decided they want change. However, as the next government takes over, it might find that Taiwan has joined the recession club. Ma has placed all the nation’s eggs in China’s basket, making it a lot easier for China to use business to push for political change and economic means to push for unification.
Taiwan cannot seem to get its economy going and if it is impossible to quickly turn things around, the next government will also be the target of public complaint. The KMT claims to know how the economy works, but it has been left with egg on its face. The next government will be presented with a mess, but it will have to sustain attacks internally, from the KMT, and externally, from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Taiwan’s economy did not reach this low overnight and it might not be easy for the next government to make quick improvements. Controlling the difficult political and economic situation would require not only artistry, it would also need planning and determination.
Following the elections, the KMT’s internal power struggles and ideology are likely to become even more apparent. During this election campaign, the KMT has attacked the DPP over US pork imports while at the same time attempting to open Taiwan to more agricultural imports from China. It seems the KMT and the CCP are preparing to cooperate in an attempt to counterbalance cooperation between Taiwan and the US.
In regards to the KMT’s Greater China political outlook, the high-school history curriculum issue has already showed us what lies ahead. On the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) despite other issues, the Ma administration is opposed to Japan in much the same way as China is. When it comes to issues over the South China Sea, the administration is leaning toward China while ignoring the interests of US’ allies.
After the elections, the KMT is likely to continue to be led by compradors that ignore national interests, probably even to a greater extent than when it was in opposition. Fortunately, the young generation is in favor of independence and their national identity is unlikely to change.
Ma is clinging to power until May 20, his last official day in office, and he is likely to do his best to push the “one China consensus” and the “internalization of the Taiwan Strait” as far as he can. If the next government wants to put things straight again, it is likely to be attacked by the KMT and the CCP if it works against the “status quo.” The US praises the so-called “status quo” and China finds it acceptable, but there might still be a price to pay.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that she would adhere to the Republic of China’s current constitutional system and push for the peaceful and stable development of cross-strait relations based on the past 12 years of cross-strait talks and mutual exchanges. Even if she uses the current constitutional system as an expedient measure, she would not be spared an eventual clash over the “one China” issue.
It seems that even if the next government also has a legislative majority, it would still find it difficult to push for transitional justice, structural economic reform and the normalization of the nation’s status. This is what people mean by Taiwan’s “birdcage democracy.” Not only is the public’s right to have their say in national referendums restricted, the whole nation is restricted by external forces and it seems the ROC’s situation as a “temporary system” is becoming permanent, and that this “temporary system” could be annexed by legally recognizing governance by “one China”— the People’s Republic of China.
The ambiguity of the nation’s status means that defense of national sovereignty and support for the normalization of the nation’s status must pass in the legislature. This is not just a matter of winning or losing a legislative seat or two, it is about whether the highest representative institution in the land has the backbone required to manifest the nation’s will.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath