"The economy unites people; politics separate them." If we compare this principle of international political economy with the current political and economic situation in Taiwan, it looks as if the entire island is under an evil curse.
In Taiwan's politics, in order to grab more power, political figures use the strategy of "splittism" and cast out those who are difficult to cooperate with so as to ensure a monopoly of power.
In power struggles, sometimes splittism occurs naturally, but other times it may be an intentional strategy. Political figures often use splittist strategies to carry out a zero-sum competition. They undercut the loser's credibility and expel him or her from the core of power.
Over the past years, the KMT has continuously used such a strategy of splittism to break down the traditional government bureaucracy brought by the KMT regime from China. The effect has been to rid the national administration of authoritarianism and to smooth the democratic transition. The deeper the KMT splits, the more democratic Taiwan will become. It seems that the KMT's continuing centralization of its own power through eliminating sources of internal strife is an evil necessary to Taiwan's democracy.
It may seem strange to postulate that the KMT can maintain its internal authoritarianism while society becomes more and more democratic. This is possible mainly because the party machinery's control over society has been broken down by increased social power outside the party.
The KMT elite is forced to rely on the party machine to secure its vested interests, and it may be able to hold its own as democratization progresses. And this centralizes the power of the party and makes its paternalism hard to break.
On the other hand, members of the KMT elite who lose the support of the party and choose to walk into the crowds are united with social movements outside the party and thus justify their competition for power. As more and more political figures follow this model, the mobilization of both the party and the public turns into a state of splittism.
By observing the forthcoming presidential elections from this viewpoint, we come to realize the campaign strategies of these presidential hopefuls. The March presidential elections are a war of elite mobilization vs. public mobilization; they are the competition between north, center and south; and they are a strategy whereby "the countryside surrounds the city."
First, the Lien Chan (連戰)-Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) ticket has been legitimatized by the highest levels of the KMT, but it has not ended internal conflict. Although the Lien-Siew ticket has been ostensibly endorsed by the votes of the party elite, the KMT needs to make more efforts to resolve internal strife before it can concentrate on mobilizing the public.
DPP presidential candidate Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has the unanimous support of his party's elite, so he has been able to mobilize the people in his campaign rallies in Tainan and Kaohsiung.
As for James Soong (宋楚瑜), after his campaign rallies of "nomination by the people," his bid for the presidency is justified. In the future, he will have to continue to mobilize the people and maintain his high support so as to convince the social elite that he has a presidential mandate.
Secondly, Taiwan's political territory has been divided into north, center and south. The KMT won the Taipei mayoral elections last year, so the party is prevailing in Taipei City. Former Taiwan provincial governor James Soong has high popularity in Central Taiwan, where the seat of the provincial government was located. As Kaohsiung's DPP Mayor Frank Hsieh's (謝長廷) lottery disputes with the central government have triggered a north-south confrontation, Chen Shui-bian, who has lost the north as a political stage in last year's Taipei mayoral elections, has taken advantage of Hsieh's position by concentrating his campaign rallies on southern Taiwan. He has established a geopolitical foothold and is waiting for any chance to fight back in the north. Will this strategy work? It depends on whether the power struggle between Lien and Soong will give Chen a chance to break through.
The split between urban areas and the countryside is another issue that the presidential candidates have to contend with. During his tenure as provincial governor, Soong combed the island and won support in rural areas that used to be controlled by KMT local factions and "black gold" (黑金), or organized crime. Chen has roused himself to catch up to the KMT and Soong. Over the past weeks, he has been sounding out ?the southern countryside in a hope to solidify the DPP's traditional influence there. Since these three candidates are well-matched in the cities, the countryside will be the key to presidential victory.
Wang Kuen-yih is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies, Tamkang University.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Last month, two major diplomatic events unfolded in Southeast Asia that suggested subtle shifts in the region’s strategic landscape. The 46th ASEAN Summit and the inaugural ASEAN-Gulf-Cooperation Council (GCC)-China Trilateral Summit in Kuala Lumpur coincided with French President Emmanuel Macron’s high-profile visits to Vietnam, Indonesia and Singapore. Together, they highlighted ASEAN’s maturing global posture, deepening regional integration and China’s intensifying efforts to recalibrate its economic diplomacy amid uncertainties posed by the US. The ASEAN summit took place amid rising protectionist policies from the US, notably sweeping tariffs on goods from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, with duties as high as 49 percent.
RSS