Comparing Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and president-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is like comparing apples and oranges, because of their very different positions. Nonetheless, the two do share a historical significance, as together they mark the beginning of a new phase in Taiwan’s political history. It could be said that their respective elections bear double testimony to the nation’s transition from a China-centric era to a Taiwan-oriented era.
The key driving force behind this has not been Ko’s or Tsai’s personal charisma, but the collective awakening of Taiwanese who voted against the foreign Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and restored power to Taiwanese through democratic procedures — a scenario that somewhat echoes, while being very different from, the Qing Dynasty movements led by Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) and his Revive China Society to “expel Manchus and restore power to the Chinese.”
It is due to this unstoppable trend of awakening among the public that Ko, Tsai and a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative majority were all elected. Having established the historical context as a premise, it makes sense to compare Ko and Tsai.
While it is too early to call the Taipei mayor’s career a failure, there have been several signs suggesting that this will be the case. Various polls show Ko’s approval ratings are slumping. Overall, his approval rating has dropped from 70 percent to 42 percent, while his disapproval rating has risen from 10 percent to nearly 40 percent. This is the worst of all six special municipalities, even behind that of New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫). That Ko has engendered more disapproval from the public than the former chairman of the diabolical KMT is alarming.
Ko rose to the position of mayor in a city that has traditionally been a pan-blue stronghold, albeit during a time when anti-KMT sentiments gained great momentum — with many embracing the slogan: “The KMT must collapse for Taiwan to become better.”
Yet Ko has now fallen from grace to a state worse than Chu’s. Two months ago, the media were still discussing whether Ko would be Taipei mayor for a second straight term, or even replace Tsai as president in 2020, but things have gone drastically downhill for him since then.
With Ko now seen as highly replaceable, the KMT has already begun planning for the next election, with many of its members eager to be the next mayor, including former Taipei EasyCard Corp chairman Sean Lien (連勝文), who lost the 2014 Taipei mayoral election to Ko. Likewise, the DPP is eager to replace Ko with one of its members.
Ko got caught up in a paradox that is quite simple. His nonpartisan position was originally an election strategy, and later — following a long period of excused absence from the hospital he worked at — was developed as his vision for politics. Eventually, this vision became his political strategy. By turning a means into an end in itself, he consequently found himself mired in a middle-of-the-road dilemma.
One clear example was the loss of People First Party (PFP) Deputy Secretary-General Liu Wen-hsiung (劉文雄) and PFP Culture and Publicity Department director Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) in the legislative election, despite Ko’s full endorsement. This was because Ko failed to see what Taiwanese detested, mistaking Liu and Huang for the kind of legislators they would like.
From the time of the nine-in-one elections, in which Ko participated, to this year’s presidential and legislative elections, which resulted in a landslide victory for Tsai and the DPP, Taiwan has undergone a major transition as the nation turned its focus from China to itself.
According to the latest poll conducted by Taiwan Indicators Survey Research on whether “the mainland area” should be included as part of the Republic of China (ROC) if the Constitution is to be amended, 63.5 percent of the respondents said it should not, while only 19.8 percent said it should.
The statistic makes for an interesting comparison with the number of votes Tsai and Chu received in the presidential election. While Tsai garnered 53 percent of all votes, Chu received 31 percent. In other words, pro-China supporters in Taiwan have fallen from 30 percent to less than 20 percent. The number is expected to fall even more sharply.
Ko’s failure lies in his inability to deliver his political vision and his platform. On the one hand, he has been ignoring Taiwanese local awareness — having avoided events marking the 228 Massacre — and claimed the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family, while repeatedly paying respect to late president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), who killed numerous political dissidents through his secret intelligence agency.
On the other hand, Ko has been unable to clean up the mess President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), himself a former Taipei mayor, and former Taipei mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) left behind. No wonder his disapproval rating has sunk so much only one-and-a-half years into his term. Will his political career end at a pace as fast as he has risen to the top of the city? The answer is possibly yes.
The concurrent rise of Tsai and Ko has been the result of a democratic awakening. Both face a similar political situation, only Tsai must take on more challenges and responsibilities.
Ko’s downfall should serve as a reminder for Tsai to avoid ending up like him. And this is why it is worth comparing Tsai and Ko.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.
Translated by Yu-an Tu
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