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.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers