After Jan. 16, when Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won a stunning election victory, pundits and officials in Washington and some elsewhere expressed apprehension that Tsai would adopt the policies of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) — the only other DPP president.
That would transform the Taiwan Strait back into the world’s No. 1 flashpoint (place where a conflict is likely to break out with participants, meaning the US and China, using weapons of mass destruction). Some even predict a war, not just a conflict.
However, Tsai is not a Chen clone or Chen with a different name. The two are very different people.
Chen was from a poor family. He was schooled in local politics. His education was in Taiwan. He did not speak a foreign language. He was a populist. He was a magnetic speaker and that was his tool to win votes.
Chen won election to the presidency in 2000 by default. It is probably more accurate to say the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) split and lost the election than to argue that Chen won. In any case, the DPP did not win a majority in the legislature and the KMT could, and did, stymie Chen and block his agenda.
Chen’s option was to rally his base — the Fukien Taiwanese who constitute 65 percent of the population. Chen alienated the other three ethnic groups, the Hakka, Mainlanders and Aborigines, by regarding them almost as enemies (They had voted for the KMT).
He thought this was the only way he could govern, but employing a divide-and-conquer strategy and exploiting ethnic ill will had its dark side.
He also calculated that by provoking China and labeling it an enemy he could nurture local nationalism and a Taiwan identity and keep supporters on his side. However, this made the Taiwan Strait a danger zone and upset the US, which was at war with terrorism, and turned Washington against Chen.
Finally, Chen reckoned that the KMT would mend its disunity and he could rule and win re-election only if he had more money (and the KMT was a rich party). He also believed the dictum promoted by some US politicians that the richest candidate wins 90 percent of the time. So he resorted to corrupt practices in the extreme.
When Chen left office he was convicted of various offenses, with friends, relatives and foreign nations, including the US, providing evidence against him. He besmirched his own name and that of his party and Taiwan.
Tsai was born into a rich family. She is Hakka — not the same ethnic group as Chen. She prefers speaking Mandarin to Taiwanese. She earned graduate degrees from outstanding academic institutions in English-speaking nations (the US and the UK). Her government jobs were not in local politics, but rather dealing with external relations and economic issues.
She won acclaim in Taiwan’s politics and support from voters with rational policies and strategies to fix the DPP, restore respect for the party and win elections, together with hard work and persistence. She did not mesmerize crowds with her good oratory; she has admitted that her KMT opponents were better speakers and more talented in debate.
Some of her opponents accused her of corruption, but nothing has stuck. No one talks of her selling political jobs or keeping bank accounts abroad. The conclusion is that she is clean.
Tsai won election to the presidency with an unqualified victory. She attained more votes than two other candidates combined, garnering a record number of votes since Taiwan adopted a direct system for electing its presidents. She won considerable votes from Taiwan’s minority groups. She has a clear mandate to govern.
One might say she won partly because the KMT and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) did not do a good job and became unpopular. Also populism helped her. That is true. However, Tsai arguably won more by espousing ideas that would fix Taiwan’s problems and a sound election strategy.
She also had coattails. The DPP won a resounding victory in the legislature. This will ensure her relatively smooth governing. It will help Tsai advance reforms, which was part of her agenda, and which are sorely needed.
Tsai won Taiwan’s highest office not by manufacturing an enemy and promoting local nationalism as Chen did. Her policy of maintaining the “status quo” in cross-strait relations was a central tenet of her campaign.
She likewise realized that a cordial relationship with the US, or at least Washington’s neutrality in the election campaign, was essential. She convinced top officials in the US that she did not want to provoke China or take the US for granted and would not become another Chen that the US Department of State still despises.
Tsai still faces serious challenges. One is her party base. Many prefer Taiwan’s independence to the “status quo” and think their election win justifies that. They also believe China will come around. Both ideas are dangerous.
Tsai also faces a faltering economy and a less than favorable global marketplace. She has to build good relations with Taiwan’s business leaders and China. Both are, to some degree, unfriendly.
Tsai faces formidable problems. However, she is unlikely to adopt a previous president’s modus operandi to solve them.
John Copper is the Stanley J Buckman Distinguished Professor (emeritus) of International Studies at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS