During the "Super Sunday" election rallies last weekend, tens of thousands of both the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) supporters took to the streets, chanting "Oppose corruption, save Taiwan" and "Uphold reform, defend Taiwan" respectively.
This type of sloganeering reflects each party's perception of the current political climate and their ideologies. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) firmly believes that it has stumbled upon a golden opportunity to oppose corruption by exposing the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corp (KRTC) scandal, that the DPP has plunged the nation into crisis and that only it can save the nation.
As for the DPP, it has always been proud of its reformist credentials, but recently the party has become frustrated over its inability to deliver. This hasn't stopped it from calling for reform in every election over the last three years. Now that it is in the role of the underdog, the party has pledged to "defend Taiwan" in order to consolidate its hold on power.
The key point in all of this is that both parties, whether trying to "save Taiwan" or to "defend Taiwan," see Taiwan as a sovereign entity.
Saturday's elections are only local polls, so the scale of the campaigns, which have included rallies all over Taiwan and even in Taipei City, where there are no elections, seems inappropriate.
With votes taking place across the nation, except for Taipei and Kaohsiung cities, it was unavoidable that they would become a major showdown between the pan-greens and pan-blues.
For the KMT, it is clearly a case of Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), its new chairman, challenging President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) struggling administration. Politically, the results of the elections will be crucial to the future development of both the DPP and KMT and possibly the outcome of the 2008 presidential election. Therefore, these "three-in-one" local elections have escalated into a confrontation over whether the KMT can "save" Taiwan or whether the DPP can "defend" Taiwan.
Starting out as a party free of corruption, the DPP has recently been overwhelmed by the opposition's unrelenting criticism of its failings. So much so, that it seems the DPP is riddled by scandals, but in fact there are only two cases troubling the party, namely, the so-called "vulture investment group" insider-trading case and the KRTC scandal.
The probe into the KRTC scandal has the DPP facing its biggest crisis since it came to power or even since it was established, after former deputy presidential office secretary-general Chen Che-nan (
We cannot help but wonder if the president finds it difficult to employ good people. After all, the staff members who have worked directly under him have always been controversial. Ever since the president was sworn in for his second term, he has been unable to make headway in the legislature because of the KMT's majority.
After five years in power, the president still lacks the wisdom and tolerance that is required to be an effective national leader. The exposure of the KRTC scandal has simply fanned the flames of discontent among the public. To help in the elections, Chen Shui-bian has traveled around the country to stump for the DPP's candidates and, at times, made imprudent utterances. This has only backfired on himself and the DPP.
Meanwhile, the pan-blue camp's tenacious pursuit of the KRTC scandal has proved effective to the point where the DPP's popularity seems to be on the wane. This has placed the KMT in a favorable position for Saturday's elections. In all honesty, the KMT has always been clumsy at setting election issues, but it has done a good job this time in its pursuit of the scandals enveloping the DPP.
Although the KMT has made great efforts to oppose corruption and expose the DPP's scandals, it has yet to take the initiative and introduce any policy debate. By contrast, the DPP's pledge to reform the 18 percent interest rate enjoyed by retired public servants and the issue of KMT party members adding their party service years to their civil-service employment records (in order to gain better pension benefits) have all helped the DPP reinforce its reformist image. By comparison, the image of the KMT is still that of a conservative political force.
The results from tomorrow will influence the development of local politics. Only the voters can make a rational decision. If the central government can emphasize the welfare of the people rather than the party affiliation of each city mayor or county commissioner, the deadlock between the pan-greens and pan-blues could probably be more or less solved.
The current situation seems favorable to the KMT. If it is able to garner more than half of the seats or secure a landslide victory in the elections, the party's morale will be boosted, and this would improve its chances of seizing power in the 2008 presidential election.
Although the KMT selected a new chairman this year, the party has yet to conduct a complete overhaul. Therefore, we do not know if it will be able to achieve anything in the future. If the KMT does well in the polls, it should immediately seek to reform itself.
But, if Ma wins big in the elections, perhaps he and the KMT will become neglectful of reforms. If that happens, the party will have to deal with a series of problems. If the KMT emerges the loser, it will still have to make an all-out effort to reform, rather than simply making perfunctory promises as it has done in the past.
The DPP is regarded as the underdog this time round. If it emerges the winner, then luck will certainly have played an important part. The party's rank-and-file, particularly the leadership, should attempt to enhance the efficiency of both local and central governments, genuinely look into all the scandals and corruption, review the president's conduct and eradicate the root cause of the government's failings. The party definitely can not just pay lip service to its supporters this time around.
While campaigning, both camps have accused each other of being terrible politicians. This will only lead people to distrust politicians, one of the downsides of the nation's democratic achievements. It is detrimental to the nation's democratization process.
We can only hope that our politicians will stop worrying so much about the results of the elections and seek to take action in order to save the nation from plunging into a real crisis.
Chiu Hei-yuan is a research fellow in the Institute of Sociology of the Academia Sinica.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS