With the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) having nominated Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) as its presidential candidate, for voters whose main concern is that the government conducts cross-strait relations in the interests of Taiwan, the choice between Hung and the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) presidential nominee Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is simple.
Apart from their China policy, however, the positions of the two parties on a host of other issues are less clear, especially after recent comments from the DPP which indicate that it either has elements within it that hold conservative points of view, or that it is trying to appeal to that demographic ahead of January’s elections.
Two examples cast doubt on whether the DPP would lead Taiwan in a way compatible with progressive values if it wins the election.
Last week, Hung wrote on Facebook: “Chairperson Tsai, abolishing the death penalty is not a universal value, life is,” and asked Tsai to explain her position.
In response, Tsai said she has always believed that there are “two conditions” for a society to end the use of the death penalty but “the conditions are not met” in Taiwan, as there is a lack of “social consensus” on the issue and there are deficiencies in “complementary measures” — by which she might mean increasing upper sentencing limits and thresholds for parole.
Tsai then indirectly accused Hung of trying to exploit tragic events to score political points.
The second example is the way the DPP tackled what it claimed to be defamatory remarks against Tsai.
Last month, following rumors on the Internet that the seafood restaurant chain Hai Pa Wang (海霸王) was owned by Tsai’s family, the DPP reported the incident to the police and said those spreading the rumor had violated the Social Order Maintenance Act (社會秩序維護法).
The DPP also reported to the police a message spread via Line alleging that the party restrained its criticism of the Formosa Fun Coast dust explosion and resulting fire because the water park’s general manager is a long-term donor to the party.
A person surnamed Yu (余) was then charged with violating Article 63-5 of the law concerning the circulation of rumors that “undermine public order and peace” and fined NT$30,000.
The DPP is a major force that has pushed Taiwan toward democratization for decades. With the universal values enshrined in its party platform, the passive attitude Tsai adopted toward the issue of the death penalty and the legal action taken by the DPP will be big disappointments to voters who wish to elect leaders who are truly committed to progressive values.
Although it is true that the majority of the public are opposed to scrapping the death penalty, Tsai should have known that public polls yield different results when respondents are asked whether they support the abolition of the death penalty if a sentence of life without the possibility of parole is implemented.
As for the rumors, they are not personal matters and should come under public scrutiny. Reporting the cases to the police and demanding that the relevant act be applied was something that the DPP should not have done, because it looks like an effort to repress freedom of speech.
Taiwan is set to have a female president next year, a demonstration of the nation’s drive toward gender equality. In the run-up to this historic election, there should be no compromise on other progressive values.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS