The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), formed in August, has grand aspirations to transform a political landscape long dominated by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
It wants to ensure that no single party wins more than half of the seats in the legislature in the legislative elections on Jan. 11. In other words, it wants to become a “third force” party, breaking the deadlock between the pan-blue and pan-green camps.
There are already minor parties including the New Party, the People’s First Party (PFP) and the New Power Party (NPP). The first no longer has any representatives in the legislature; the second has three, much reduced from 46 in 2001; the third had five after the 2016 elections, but they fell to three after recent departures over internal disagreements over whether to support President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in the presidential election.
The NPP, formed in 2015 and emerging from the 2014 Sunflower movement, differs from the other two, which were essentially offshoots of the KMT and have been affiliated with the pan-blue camp.
The NPP is not strictly affiliated with either the green or blue camp — although its policy stances are closer to those of the DPP — and is regarded as part of the “third force” movement. Like the TPP, it aspires to provide a viable alternative to the two major parties. This insistence on remaining unaffiliated contributed to the aforementioned departures.
Having a genuine third force, even if it consists of minor parties, is important for Taiwan. The nation’s politics suffers from ineffectual partisan blockades, and embarrassing legislative and council floor tussles, exacerbated by the stagnant tribalism of a purely polarized approach to every single issue.
Having minor parties whose vote could mean the difference between the success or failure of a government proposal would arguably encourage more rational debate.
The NPP has conducted itself as a viable and strong opposition party in the short span of its existence, in part because it has little chance of increasing any time soon its tally of legislative seats to the point where it could challenge the major parties electorally.
Not only has it worked to provide oversight and checks and balances, it has also made a string of solid policy proposals to ensure its stances on human rights and fairness are represented.
The TPP was formed by Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), who also acts as its chairman. Ko was originally elected as Taipei mayor on the same promise he now makes for the TPP: to function as a third force. He gained many supporters with the promise, and brings this support to the party he has founded, despite gaffes — some inappropriate for a leader (amphetamine use), some utterly inexcusable (jokes about suicide) — that would have felled another politician. He has certainly identified voter frustration with the current situation.
It is possible that the TPP will be able to fulfill its stated goals, even without Ko at its helm. However, while Ko is a known quantity, the party is untested, and even if it does make significant gains in the legislative election, there is nothing to say that it would be able to keep them. One has to look no further than the precipitous fall of the PFP since its initial successes in 2001.
The TPP must ensure that it follows in the same spirit as the NPP, and not descend into populist, inconsequential appeals to voters simply to build up its number of legislators. Linked as it is to Ko, it must also clarify its position on issues such as national security and cross-strait issues.
It must address the baggage that Ko brings, not just the gaffes, but more importantly his record of incautious engagement with Chinese officials and ill-thought out proclamations, such as “both sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family.”
If it does this, it could be good for Taiwan’s politics.
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