Having lost the presidential election on Jan. 14, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is now analyzing the reasons for its defeat. A report is expected at the end of this month.
Outgoing DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has said she thinks the party should review its performance in a scientific and professional way, thereby identifying the obstacles that need to be overcome to secure electoral victory in the future.
It is often said that “success has many fathers; failure is an orphan.” Although success is always easier to deal with, losers still need to analyze the reasons for failure. This may be a tough task, but it is absolutely unavoidable.
Regardless of how many causes are ultimately identified for the DPP’s defeat, chief responsibility lies with the party itself, not the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), nor the wider social environment.
For the DPP the review is an important display of political intent because it is essential that the party honestly and openly discusses its failure to win the presidential election.
After winning re-election, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) said he stayed at home over the Lunar New Year holiday to contemplate his mistakes and why the KMT failed to repeat its landslide victory of 2008. Following this period of “contemplation” he said at a weekly KMT meeting that local governments had tried to take all the credit for the central government’s investments in southern Taiwan, adding that it was necessary to step up the dissemination of information to counter such claims.
It is surprising that a newly re-elected president would feel the need to draw such a distinction between central and local government, divide the nation into north and south, and pigeonhole people as pan-blue or pan-green.
Does that mean that Ma is president of just the 6.89 million people who voted for him, and that those who did not can choose to not recognize his presidency?
Clearly his talk of contemplation is just hot air, with nothing to back it up. Only through honest contemplation and introspection can one expect to win the respect of others. A leader who is capable of only seeing the faults of others has little credibility.
This should serve as a warning to the DPP to avoid making the same mistakes as Ma. If it wants to retain public support, the party review needs to start by asking how the DPP can do better next time.
Perhaps it would help to characterize party organization as a series of concentric circles.
After four years as DPP chairperson, dominating its direction and use of resources, Tsai has a great deal of power and so finds herself at the center of the first circle. In the second circle we find those closest to the center of power. The people in the third circle have less power, and as the circles grow in size, so the access to power and influence diminishes.
Based on the idea that there should be a balance between power and responsibility, most people would accept that the more power you have, the more responsibility you must accept.
If the DPP is to draw any lessons from its defeat — particularly as it appeared to have a good chance of winning at one point — it needs a foundation on which to continue to build for the future.
If the party fails to take advantage of this opportunity, then the next election is likely to end the same way. In order to move forward, the DPP must start over again.
A few days ago, Tsai said that the responsibility for the electoral defeat was hers, and there can be little doubt as to the truth of that statement — after all, who else is to blame?
Ma was elected with 51.6 percent of the vote, which means that 48.4 percent of voters did not vote for him. Despite this, and the fact that his second term has not even started yet, he is already displaying a winner-takes-all attitude.
Although there is no longer any hope that he will bring about reform over the next four years, in the wake of the elections political parties have started to discuss changes to the legislative electoral system and a rare cross-party consensus is taking shape. Even KMT members have criticized the inheritance of political power and the unequal value of ballots.
Ma alone insists that a constitutional amendment is of no urgency, making it clear that he is more interested in consolidating his own power than democracy. Only someone devoid of values and ideals could hold such a narrow view.
The country has been handed to a power-hungry party with no concern for public opinion, leaving it at a critical crossroads. How can the DPP not do everything in its power to remedy this situation?
Four years ago, the KMT defeated the DPP by more than 2 million votes. Last month, that deficit was reduced to less than 800,000 votes. The DPP must not wait another four years before it starts to compete for power again; it must start today.
Although the DPP is understandably in an introspective mood as it sets about analyzing the reasons for its defeat, it is imperative that it continues to engage the public in a dialogue.
Most people do not want to hear excuses, or attempts to shirk responsibility or take credit. The DPP must admit its mistakes and apologize for failing to live up to the expectations of its supporters if it wants to win greater public support.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS