Unifying Taiwan has become a key priority for President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) in his second term.
"We must unite for the sake of Taiwan," he said in his May 20 inauguration speech.
Chen is aware that the
presidential election has deeply divided the nation's social fabric. From a moral viewpoint, Chen has to adopt a more mainstream position because he was re-elected by a narrow margin. From a practical
perspective, he needs a high degree of social consensus to enact constitutional reforms.
Chen also knows that a divided society would weaken the nation in the face of China's military threat.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) campaigners portrayed both opposition leaders as pro-Beijing on the grounds that they were born in China and disagreed with Chen's reform plans. In contrast, Chen used his son-of-Taiwan tag to stress that as a native Taiwanese he was the most fit to defend the nation's interests.
Chen helped turn the presidential election into an ethnic vote by appealing to nationalist sentiments.
With Chen's ethnically divisive rhetoric, the Lien-Soong ticket lost voter support among the Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), the largest ethnic group in Taiwan. Unsurprisingly, Lien secured most of the votes of Mainlanders.
Mainlanders -- those who emigrated from China after the end of World War II and their descendants, and who represent less than 20 percent of Taiwan's population -- felt alienated by Chen's definition of Taiwanese identity.
As a result of increasing Taiwanese identity over the years, the percentage of votes for the DPP has risen from 20 percent in 1996 to 39 percent in 2000 and 50.1 percent this year.
Since the election, Chen has had a choice between a narrow concept of Taiwanese identity and the more inclusive notion of a Taiwanese melting pot. Taiwan faced a situation of apartheid under the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) dictatorship,
when the Mainlander minority oppressed local culture.
The danger for Chen, then, was to fall in to the trap of a reversed apartheid by ethnically defining Taiwanese identity.
But in his May 20 inauguration speech, Chen advocated "more tolerance and understanding" between ethnic groups and acknowledged the contribution of other cultures to Taiwanese identity.
Is the president sincere? Chen, after all, is a fantastic political animal, the kind of campaigner any party would like to have on its side.
Chen could send a strong message on his intention to transcend political differences by incorporating politicians from the opposition in his administration, as he did in 2000. But if Chen really wants to translate his blueprint for unity into concrete action, he should quit the chairmanship
of the DPP. Only by standing above partisan cleavages will Chen be able to be president for all Taiwanese.
If Chen retains the leadership of the DPP, however, he will barely be able to maintain a balance between moderates and independence activists. And how can Chen refrain from stirring up ethnic tensions again if he
campaigns for candidates in December's legislative elections?
Chen enjoys more support than his party as a whole. It would be tempting, therefore, for the party to use Chen's popularity to win a majority for the first time in the Legislative Yuan.
There will be strong pressure on Chen to stump for the DPP as it aims to achieve this with the help of its ally, the Taiwan Solidarity Union. But the DPP's thirst for power does not accord with Chen's goal
of bringing about reconciliation between the parties.
Soft-spoken rhetoric hardly goes hand-in-hand with provocative campaign slogans. The year-end election is likely to revive antagonism between the government and the opposition. And Chen could risk losing his credibility if he is involved in that battle.
Former Presidential Office secretary-general Chiou I-jen (邱義仁) has made it clear that the DPP would not merely continue with the cutthroat strategy used during the presidential election campaign.
Instead, he said, it would "cut at the head of the opposition until it falls off" to grab nativist votes from them.
As DPP chairman, Chen would have difficulty in adopting a conciliatory line. He would face pressure from his own party and especially from pro-independence members who would press him to honor his platform, whatever the cost.
Historically, DPP moderates have been treated as lone birds. Former DPP chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) left the DPP because his idea of a "great
reconciliation" between parties was at odds with its political goals. More recently, DPP Legislator Shen Fu-hsiung (沈富雄) was criticized from within the DPP when he suggested that candidates should refrain from manipulating ethnic issues and fanning Mainlander-Taiwanese antagonism to gain votes.
If Chen really has Taiwan's unity at the forefront of his thinking, his fate within his party will be that of a lone bird.
Trung Latieule is a journalist based in Paris.
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