Just as the former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration’s incompetence and constant fawning over China prompted waves of mass protests during former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) eight years in office, the public’s collective wish for a better future was what propelled the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to power in January.
It was not the DPP’s merits alone that saw Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) elected as president, but also public indignation over the KMT’s China-leaning policies, ill-conceived proposals, and poor administration and execution. Voters were hoping that a change in government would improve the nation, with a shift in attitude toward cross-strait affairs and policies that better address concerns over social justice and national competitiveness.
Yet, in the nearly three months of her presidency, the Tsai administration’s performance has been disappointing, if not far from public expectations.
Yes, the Legislative Yuan, in which the DPP holds a majority, has accomplished the decade-long quest of passing the Act Governing the Handling of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations (政黨及其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例), a laudable first step toward addressing transitional justice. How the executive branch implements the act remains to be seen, however.
Putting that aside, a greater concern has been the manner in which Tsai is making personnel appointments.
First was her nomination of Public Functionary Disciplinary Sanction Commission Chief Commissioner Hsieh Wen-ting (謝文定) and Judicial Yuan Secretary-General Lin Chin-fang (林錦芳) as Judicial Yuan president and vice president respectively. Although Hsieh and Lin on Sunday withdrew their nominations with Tsai’s consent, that Tsai even thought of naming people with such a controversial past — with one purportedly linked to human rights violations during the KMT’s authoritarian rule — is incomprehensible.
Tsai’s judgement on personnel appointments has not only raised doubts over her claims to defend democratic values, but also sparked indignation among people who had pinned their hopes on her administration redressing miscarriages of justice during the White Terror era.
The withdrawal of the nomination, which was met with harsh public criticism and a lukewarm reception even among DPP lawmakers, demonstrated just how big the gap is between the Tsai administration and public expectations.
Another example that calls into question Tsai’s judgement is the appointment of former Council for Economic Planning and Development chairman Chen Tain-jy (陳添枝) as minister of the National Development Council.
Chen was best known for his ardent push for the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) with China during Ma’s presidency. His appointment to a position that handles the nation’s development and economic competitiveness policies, in addition to Tsai’s recruitment of other former KMT, pro-ECFA government officials into the new government’s “new southbound policy” program, has many questioning Tsai’s beliefs and judgement, and wondering whether she has had a change of heart since coming to power.
A poll released by Taiwan Indicators Survey Research yesterday showed that Tsai’s approval rating has dipped below 50 percent, while her disapproval rating has risen from 32.3 percent last month to 39.8 percent.
While some might argue that it is natural for a leader to suffer a dip in support after the so-called “honeymoon” period, Tsai should be reminded that “public opinion is like flowing water” — if she does not keep the water flowing, her detachment from mainstream public opinion will see her pounded by a wave of public dissatisfaction just as powerful as the one that swept her into office in the first place.
With its passing of Hong Kong’s new National Security Law, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) continues to tighten its noose on Hong Kong. Gone is the broken 1997 promise that Hong Kong would have free, democratic elections by 2017. Gone also is any semblance that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) plays the long game. All the CCP had to do was hold the fort until 2047, when the “one country, two systems” framework would end and Hong Kong would rejoin the “motherland.” It would be a “demonstration-free” event. Instead, with the seemingly benevolent velvet glove off, the CCP has revealed its true iron
At the end of last month, Paraguayan Ambassador to Taiwan Marcial Bobadilla Guillen told a group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators that his president had decided to maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan, despite pressure from the Chinese government and local businesses who would like to see a switch to Beijing. This followed the Paraguayan Senate earlier this year voting against a proposal to establish ties with China in exchange for medical supplies. This constituted a double rebuke of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) diplomatic agenda in a six-month span from Taiwan’s only diplomatic ally in South America. Last year, Tuvalu rejected an
US President Donald Trump’s administration on Friday last week announced it would impose sanctions on the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, a vast paramilitary organization that is directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and has been linked to human rights violations against Uighurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang. The sanctions follow US travel bans against other Xinjiang officials and the passage of the US Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which authorizes targeted sanctions against mainland Chinese and Hong Kong officials, in response to Beijing’s imposition of national security legislation on the territory. The sanctions against the corps would be implemented
US President Donald Trump on Thursday issued executive orders barring Americans from conducting business with WeChat owner Tencent Holdings and ByteDance, the Beijing-based owner of popular video-sharing app TikTok. The orders are to take effect 45 days after they were signed, which is Sept. 20. The orders accuse WeChat of helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) review and remove content that it considers to be politically sensitive, and of using fabricated news to benefit itself. The White House has accused TikTok of collecting users’ information, location data and browsing histories, which could be used by the Chinese government, and pose