Much is being made of whether new Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairman Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰), who is counted among the party’s “middle generation,” will be loyal to President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文).
However, loyalty to the president is beside the point, as is the preoccupation of certain self-proclaimed representatives of the party’s pro-independence elements on who will be the party’s 2020 presidential candidate.
If the party cannot win voters’ approval in the short space of the next 12 months, it hardly matters who will be the candidate, for it will lose.
In the same way, if the DPP fails to acknowledge its faults and does not transform itself quickly, the chairman will be similarly doomed.
The DPP’s problems are evident.
First is its responsiveness to current issues. When Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) took up the post, he proposed ideas such as a Kaohsiung-Pingtung international airport and Chinese-style tour packages. DPP legislators and Kaohsiung city councilors disregarded his ideas out of hand.
Meanwhile, independent Pingtung County Councilor Chiang Yueh-hui (蔣月惠) and Taoyuan City Councilor Wang Hao-yu (王浩宇) of the Green Party Taiwan responded quickly.
Wang, armed with statistics, asked Han’s supporters what they want for Taiwan, while Chiang cautioned that the people who need increased tourism most would not benefit from Chinese-style tour packages.
That Chiang and Wang engaged in this discussion was laudable; but what of the DPP’s elected representatives? Did they not deem these issues worthy of their attention? Or were they off otherwise entertaining themselves? What future do elected representatives have when they cannot be bothered with engaging in a debate over issues concerning the public?
The party’s second Achilles’ heel was its command — or lack thereof — of social media.
Social media platforms can define the debate, but they also allow candidates to engage with the public.
Popular apps such as Line and Facebook have transformed election campaigns, completely changing the way that people communicate, how messages are spread and how groups are swayed.
DPP headquarters and the party’s mayoral candidates were unprepared compared with the vastly more media-savvy campaigns of their opponents, with Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) trouncing his opponent in clickrates and Han having his daughter managing his online messaging apps for him.
The DPP candidates, by comparison, still relied on traditional media, using outdated channels to interact with voters.
It was a non-starter for communicating with younger voters right from the get-go. The DPP was fighting an uphill battle and it is no surprise that it lost.
The DPP’s problems in setting the debate and communicating with voters are exacerbated by its organizational shortcomings.
The party lost to a controversial candidate in Yilan County, generally regarded a DPP stronghold, and was in complete disarray in Tainan, another city traditionally a dead cert for the party.
These problems were symptomatic of an aging, inflexible and inadequate organization. DPP supporters are more fickle than those of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT): The public owes the party nothing and once it feels let down, it can rescind its support at any time.
None of this is rocket science.
If Cho fails to face up to these challenges, he will be swept away by the tide of history before he has a chance to settle in to his new position.
Mike Chang is an accountant.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with