The fourth Legislative Yuan was probably no worse than its predecessor. However, the behavior of many of its members right before their departure still made people shake their heads. While many laws may have been enacted, many problems remain.
The fourth Legislative Yuan passed 624 bills, more than any previous legislative session. Many of the bills passed were related to the Economic Development Advisory Conference (EDAC, 經發會). Their enactment deserves recognition, as they constitute a major contribution to the revival of Taiwan's economy. However, it is disappointing that the Financial Supervisory Board Organization Law (金融監督委員會組織法), key to successful reform of Taiwan's financial system, was not passed because of serious disagreement over how to choose board members.
The Legislative Yuan also approved the government budget for the fiscal year 2002. Concerned that major budget cuts would prompt attacks by the ruling party, the opposition parties adopted a new strategy, under which major cuts were made to annual government revenues, but smaller cuts were made to government expenditures. As a result, a record-breaking NT$8.5 billion was cut from the budget. The opposition parties did not review the budget item by item. Instead, they first decided on the dollar amount of the cut, and then asked the government to comply with the demand. The amendment to the Law Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) was passed in a similarly violent manner. In both cases, power struggles among the political parties replaced rational discussion.
Opposition lawmakers could also be accused of procrastination. They completed much of their work right before the end of the session. They convened for 48 hours straight in a marathon final meeting. This is not how things should be. The Legislative Yuan should establish a model of regular and periodic negotiations between the opposition and ruling parties to improve legislative efficiency. Abusing their legislative majority, the opposition has refused to engage in negotiation and randomly deleted budgets at will. This irresponsible behavior by the KMT is an insult to the KMT's 50 years' experience as a ruling party.
Even so, lawmakers' efficiency has improved somewhat, although their sense of judgement and self-discipline have further to go. For example, a small number of lawmakers tried to bring former legislators under the same regulations as former politically appointed officials (政務官). Then, to help Tainan County Legislator Hung Yu-chin (洪玉欽), who was defeated in the December elections, the KMT tried to take advantage of a sickly PFP lawmaker by amending the Election and Recall Law (選罷法). The KMT tried to amend the law so that a deceased lawmaker's vacancy may be filled without an election. And the regulation on compensation to veterans of the 1958 cross-strait conflict may have been smuggled through had the media not voiced its strong opposition. The alleged collective bribery of lawmakers for their endorsement of the Electronic Game Regulation Act (電子遊戲場業管理條例) triggered calls for the passage of a political donations law. However, lawmakers still refused to put a rope around their own necks, and the law did not pass.
In the future, no party will have a majority in the legislature. But the ruling "pan-green" and the opposition "pan-blue" groups are relatively equal in strength. A balance of terror may be maintained between them. However, the opposition won't have an absolute majority to abuse. So, a rational negotiation mechanism should be established to foster a democratic congressional culture. Hopefully, the chaos in the past legislative session might be the darkness before the dawn.
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