For the first time since the first direct presidential election was held in Taiwan on March 23, 1996, President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) eight years in office will provide a historic lens to look at how the presidential system has worked with the election of a pro-unification president. Indeed, it provides much food for thought. From the perspective of the electorate, the Ma years represent their first experience of being governed by a directly elected president who also happens to be pro-unification.
However, it seems that the electorate has had quite enough of the experience. Other reasons notwithstanding, the system has been found wanting. While on the surface people could say that a given president can only seek re-election once, this also comes with fixed-term guarantees, which is the source of much concern for a great many people.
Taiwanese have had to allow a president, who has been labelled a “bumbler” and someone willing to surrender national sovereignty, to run around like a bull in a China shop for the best part of a decade. In theory, he should have been rendered a lame duck president some time ago, but in fact he has been able to push through on the strength of his party, leaving the entire nation unable to do anything about it.
All that can be done now is to wait for the election next year. Even then there will be a four-month waiting period before a new president is sworn in. The president-elect will be like a prince waiting on the sidelines for his father, the king, clinging on to his last breath, to pass. During that time, the nation will be in a state of limbo.
Especially with the long-standing and intractable stand-off between the pro-unification and pro-independence camps, the public is set to endure a four-month handover period, with a directly elected, pro-unification president remaining legally in control of the nation, with voters unable to use the law to curtail his misuse of constitutional power. Up until the last minute of his term, on the eve of the official handover of presidential power, he will remain the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and the highest representative of the nation. What will he do in the intervening period?
In 2005, then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) joined forces with former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) to promote the idea of a new constitution. In the political climate of that time, when the nation had yet to experience the governance of a pro-unification president, it was easy to assume that any president would be pro-
independence, and there was near unanimous support for the presidential system and direct presidential elections. Little has changed since then, and the pro-independence camp sees it as only natural that Taiwan should have a presidential system and direct elections.
Given the wounds inflicted by this bumbling bull of a president, at a time when Taiwanese are still anticipating a long handover period in which a pro-unification regime remains in power, and when there are no guarantees that a second pro-unification president will not be elected, people might want to think long and hard about whether the system is right for Taiwan.
For example, the parliamentary Cabinet system does not have fixed-term guarantees: The nation could have a collective decisionmaking model that more accurately reflects the public mood on the unification-
independence issue, instead of concentrating power in one individual, therefore avoiding a situation where the Presidential Office is the source of national turmoil. Surely that is worth thinking about.
Christian Fan Jiang is deputy convener of the Northern Taiwan Society’s legal and political group.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS