Recently, two KMT legislative candidates in Taipei City, Chen Horng-chi (
Let's leave the pair's true motives aside for the time being, ignoring both the likely impact on the election climate and speculation about the war that it will cause within the KMT.
Let's simply consider the appropriate norms for party cooperation and the procedures that should be adhered to. In these terms, this call for post-electoral cooperation to save Taiwan is not without an element of political scheming.
DPP Chairman Frank Hsieh (
In well functioning democratic politics, it is quite difficult for political parties to avoid cooperation. The experience of advanced Western democracies proves that there is room for cooperation between parties with widely divergent ideologies -- even though inter-party debate is often intense.
The Rainbow Coalition government in Finland, led by the Social Democratic Party, included the Left Alliance, formerly the Communist Party, and the Green Party. This combination not only had the effect of stabilizing the political situation, but also serves as a prime example of alliance and cooperation between parties that have traditionally regarded each other as enemies.
In Taiwan, the gap between the ideologies of the pan-KMT and pan-DPP camps is wide. The foundation for mutual trust is quite weak and, at each election, the relationship between the two sides gets torn to shreds. Since no government has made any effort to reverse the polarized state of political relations, I fear that a miracle will be needed if the two sides are to discuss post-electoral cooperation.
In other words, since the government doesn't consider the true meaning of party cooperation from a moral point of view, concentrating only on underhanded schemes for undermining other parties in order to consolidate its own power, it will be difficult to create long-term political stability.
Further, even if the government does manage to forge a working legislative majority, it will still have an unstable Cabinet. Politicians changing their minds due to selfish interest, may at any mo-ment create political turmoil.
Party cooperation in Western countries mainly follows one of two models. The first model involves long term alliances and cooperation, with the ultimate goal of creating coalition governments. The second model is to find temporary compromise on a case-by-case basis. These two models both have the effect of stabilizing the political situation, but both are based on inter-party talks.
Generally speaking, even if the only purpose of inter-party cooperation in Western countries is to pass a specific piece of legislation or to implement a specific policy, they will first hold inter-party talks where compromises are forged. Additionally, these compromises are sometimes codified with the signing of formal agreements, the purpose being to guarantee the parties' good intentions and promises to cooperate.
Apart from the distribution of government posts, inter-party cooperation normally includes support from the prime minister or government leader, promises not to topple the government during the term, and the establishment of basic principles for policy implementation.
KMT-DPP cooperation is not the sole possible form of inter-party cooperation, but, from the point of view of the strength of political parties and the direction of Taiwan's political development, the KMT and the DPP certainly are two forces that would be capable of stabilizing the political situation.
The problem is, however, that if the government doesn't base its considerations on how to stabilize the political situation with principled policy making, then blue-green party cooperation will probably remain a pipe dream.
A meeting between President Chen Shui-bian (
It could be said that political cooperation is about forming majority governments and stabilizing the political situation, but it must follow appropriate rules and processes and it must attempt to pull together the ideas and policy outlines of the cooperating partners. Given the domestic and international concerns that face Taiwan, the government should consider how to end the rift between parties and build a mechanism for negotiations to promote inter-party cooperation.
Targeting possible defectors from other parties will make it difficult to avoid the intensification of the common, bitter enmity between the groups nor will it be helpful in stabilizing the political situation.
The opposition and ruling parties have more than once voiced concerns that, due to partisan wrangling, Taiwan night not be able to recover from the current recession. The government should use this common ground as a starting point to do what it has long promised -- dispel the chaos and restore order.
Wu Tung-yeh is a research fellow at the Institute for International Relations, National Chengchi University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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