The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been in a good mood of late — and for good reason. Three famous victories in KMT-held electorates in legislative by-elections this month gave the party hope that the gap between it and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could be dramatically reduced at the next full legislative election.
The DPP victory in Taitung County, a traditional fortress for the KMT, was especially potent for its symbolism: If that mountain can be scaled, then why not dream of an historic transfer of legislative power?
Next month sees four legislative by-elections, and the DPP has a good chance of taking three of them. The fourth contest, in pro-KMT Hualien County, is not looking as good, with polling and common sense weighing heavily against the DPP candidate, former Taipei-based legislator Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴).
Even without Hualien, the DPP has another chance to pile pressure on President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) ahead of the next round of talks on an economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with China.
The main game, however, is not these by-elections, but the special municipality elections at the end of the year. If the grinding noises coming from the DPP machine are a guide, there is still a lot of work to do.
It should be of concern to party members, for example, that Hsiao was selected for the Hualien race. While quite insignificant in national terms, the contest has shown that the DPP is still wasting opportunities and misusing resources.
Hsiao has strong support in certain quarters, particularly young urbanites, but it is hard to see why they, or Hsiao herself, would want her subjected to certain defeat in the eastern county. When running symbolic — as opposed to competitive — campaigns in safe seats, it is best to use local people, and preferably those with a point to prove. Such races are ideal for those rising in party ranks looking for a chance to show what they can do.
Hsiao is not such a candidate. The Hualien race, for the DPP, will therefore be a wasted opportunity.
Looking ahead, there are tremendous opportunities for the DPP in the year-end elections, but its prospects in certain races, as with the KMT, are threatened by vainglorious candidates whose contribution would be destructive to the party’s interests at the national level.
Even assuming that these candidates drop out as the months pass, the DPP will be doing well to launch a campaign for the Kaohsiung special municipality without petty bickering undermining its chances. It will take insight and true leadership from DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) to broker a deal that can see Kaohsiung stay in DPP hands while preserving resources for the 2012 presidential race.
Possibly the best scenario for the DPP is to avoid an ugly showdown between Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) and Kaohsiung County Commissioner Yang Chiu-hsing (楊秋興) by turning them into a dream-team combined ticket with Chen at the helm. Yang supporters might smart at this, but the chances of the pair retaking their combined electorates would be enhanced, and Chen, who is far and away the DPP’s best campaigner at this time, could pass the reins to Yang if she chooses to run for president in 2012.
All of this depends on the humility of Yang — and the smarts of party boss Tsai. If Tsai is gracious and wise enough, she will see that it is not her, but Chen who is the party’s best bet for the presidential race, and that her own role is to facilitate that victory.
It is still early days, but given the DPP’s sordid experience of split votes and mediocre candidates over the last few years, it’s never too early to identify a winning strategy and sell it to an edgy electorate.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS