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
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS