Twelve years after direct presidential elections were introduced here, the first-ever presidential debate will be held this afternoon. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
The debate is both historically significant and politically necessary. It opens an arena where no false allegations, finger pointing or war of words can dominate -- one where both candidates can elaborate on their vision and policies in a more rational and practical way.
From now on, voters will be able to insist that a candidate spell out his or her program and vision so they can choose a candidate to fulfill a specific mandate. Issues and messages are more effective than image building in attracting votes. Candidates also need to show their ability to resolve problems by seeing the other side's point of view.
What should be expected from the debate? At least three issues must be addressed: national identity, political institutionalization and a feasible vision for the future of this nation.
An incumbent almost always carries more burdens than his or her challengers. While pursuing plans to hold a referendum and write a new constitution, Chen must persuade voters of the extent to which he can tackle both internal and external pressures. His insistence on independent sovereignty has consolidated the notion of Taiwanese consciousness. How to further deepen democracy without bringing the nation to the brink of crisis is one of his challenges.
For Lien, his life-long embrace of the "one China" principle and his failure to distance himself from Beijing's implicit endorsement have created troubles for the pan-blue camp.
Lien will have to explain how he would protect national security as part of his pledge to immediately open direct links if he is elected. Can he carry out his agenda without accepting Beijing's "one China" precondition? Does he include "independence" as one of the options for future cross-strait relations? Those are questions that cannot be left unanswered.
One of the greatest tasks facing the next president is how to institutionalize the democratic system. Chen has outlined a blueprint for writing a new constitution and institutionalizing clean politics. Such attempts would bypass the lengthy -- and often impractical -- tradition procedures for constitutional reform. The question is to what extent he can ensure that his alternative process will be smooth and peaceful. Chen must also present a defense against the opposition's accusations that his administration is tainted by "black gold."
As a long-time KMT member and official, Lien must come clean about both the party's "black gold" history and his own. He cannot simply try to pass the blame on to former president Lee Teng-hui (
Both Chen and Lien have issued many "electoral checks" -- promises -- to voters. Can all or even some of these checks be cashed and, if so, at what cost? Where are the financial resources to support all the proposed social-welfare projects? How do they propose Taiwan transform itself in the face of globalization and the rise of China's economic and political clout?
The voters deserve fair and workable answers. The future of the nation depends upon it.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS