In a democracy, the public entrusts political power to the government and has the right and duty to monitor how that power is used. One year after President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office, the public is justified in its dissatisfaction with the performance of his administration.
Economic figures over the past year make a mockery of Ma’s campaign promise of 6 percent GDP growth, average annual income of US$30,000 and less than 3 percent unemployment. Taiwan’s economy has instead contracted for four consecutive quarters, shrinking by a record 8.36 percent in the fourth quarter last year. Many companies have cut salaries or forced workers to take unpaid leave, while unemployment has hit 5.81 percent. Despite the government’s attempts to boost the economy, including tax relief measures and a stimulus budget, the nation’s finances have deteriorated and its credit rating has worsened.
In terms of politics, the Ma administration is steering the nation down a road of democratic regression. Earlier this month, US-based Freedom House released its 2009 Freedom of the Press survey, in which Taiwan’s ranking slipped to 43rd place from last year’s 32nd. Taiwan was cited as an example of the worldwide decline in press freedom.
Ma promised many things when he took office: that his government would not tolerate political interference in the media, that it would protect human rights and deepen Taiwan’s democracy, and that the judiciary would remain impartial. Instead, the government has diluted the power of the legislature, proposed a stricter version of the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法), meddled in the media and put too much power in the hands of one man.
Most troubling is that the government is pursuing closer ties with China regardless of the potential damage to Taiwan’s sovereignty. Ma has pursued detente in the areas of defense and diplomacy while throwing the doors open to China economically. He supports the so-called 1992 Consensus and has called a “diplomatic truce” with Beijing.
Yet Ma dares not voice his interpretation of “one China” either abroad or at home, where his government has made concessions on the nation’s name, Ma’s title of president and displaying the national flag. Taiwan has been invited to attend the World Health Assembly as an observer, but the faxed invitation was addressed to Taipei City, with no country identified. But according to the WHO Web site, Taipei would be in “Taiwan, province of China.”
As to negotiations over an economic cooperation framework agreement with China, the Ma administration is not taking into account the concerns of the public and opposition parties and has ruled out holding a referendum on the issue.
Yesterday, tens of thousands of people took to the streets and launched a sit-in protest in front of the Presidential Office. The public expects more of its government. It expects the Ma administration to stem unemployment and propose policies to help underprivileged sections of society. Above all, it expects the government to protect Taiwan and safeguard its sovereignty. The government has a duty to heed the public’s voice.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS