What ever sympathy the moderates and pan-green supporters may have felt for the campaign of former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-Teh (
From the outset, the plan made people question whether Shih and his gang had gone too far and were flirting with extremism.
If Shih had any sense left, he would stop threatening to launch a strike. Such talk will only distance a large number of people who -- for a variety of different reasons -- feel highly disappointed with Chen but would choose to put up with him for a little longer over taking the country down the path of self-destruction.
When talk of a general strike began to surface, six industrial groups, including the Chinese National Federation of Industry and the Taiwan Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association, immediately called on Shih and his followers to refrain from pursuing the idea.
The disapproval of the business sector for this course of action is clear. Whatever complaints business may have against Chen for the current state of the economy, they dislike even more any talk of a strike. After all, Taiwan has never had a general strike. Launching one would set a precedent that Taiwan's business sector does not want to see.
If Shih persists down this path, most pan-blue politicians will be forced to distance themselves from his cause. Politicians have future elections to think about. While the newly assembled legion of A-bian haters is probably enough to get Shih elected to whatever post he chooses -- if, that is, he decides to return to politics -- this throng is not large enough to put key pan-blue politicians into office.
They have to worry about how people in other parts of society and elsewhere along the political spectrum perceive this rally. The business sectors' opposition to a strike could also translate into reduced support for individual pan-blue candidates around election time. And that means less money for increasingly expensive campaigns.
It is impossible to ignore the everyday people who have supported Shih's rally -- they identify with his idealism and the call for moral rectitude. But would their support be sufficient to make them join in a strike? This is nothing like donating NT$100 for the anti-Chen campaign, indicating support for Chen's resignation in polls or even joining the sit-in.
What is at stake is people's jobs, which puts bread on the family table and pays for school tuition fees. When the price for ousting a political leader with a less than clean moral record is so personal and so costly, how many people would actually join the cause?
This fact has not been overlooked by Shih's organizing team, which explains why Shih has been changing his tune -- if only slightly -- when pressed about the possibility of a strike.
Most people realize by now that the sit-in by itself isn't going to be enough to force Chen to step down. This is why Shih is making the risky move of threatening a strike.
So what happens next? It is not in anyone's interest for the impasse to continue indefinitely. Perhaps it is time to think about how to provide a way for Shih to exit the scene gracefully. Accomplishing this task should be the number one priority for the DPP government and Chen.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS