The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) election losses might not have been completely unexpected for most people, but their extent probably was.
In just a few months, someone with no roots in Kaohsiung managed to build momentum and win the city’s mayoral election — was this really because he is such an incredible guy? It all came down to the central government’s failures — manna from heaven, so to speak.
The party was also given a drubbing in Taichung. Was it all really a matter of the local government having done such a bad job or the opponent being such a fantastically strong challenger?
No, it was none of that: It was a direct reaction to the central government’s poor performance.
This is not the kind of talk that top officials, and especially the president, want to hear, nor would they ever admit to it being true. They would flatly reject the idea, claiming that the elections had nothing to do with the central government.
Taiwan is geographically small — little distance separates the central government from the various levels of local government — but even if the US and large European nations were twice or three times as big and had considerably bigger populations, the same thing would hold true: The national government’s performance has a direct effect on local elections.
If the national government performs badly, the ruling party will be in for a difficult time in local elections. This is Politics 101 — a party that does not grasp this might as well go home.
Last year, people said that “reform” might be a pretty word, but that there was a logical order to things and reforms should not be implemented in a batch, all at the same time.
Did anyone in the government listen? No. The government pushed through the “one mandatory day off, one flexible rest day” work week reform, same-sex marriage and pension reform without stopping to think.
A politically savvy leader might have been satisfied with the party asset and judicial reforms and left the other reforms, which would likely have a greater effect on the elections, for their second term. Had that been the case, Taiwan probably would not be faced with the current ugly situation.
This is not a case of 20/20 hindsight. Ask any five people and they would all say that it was too hasty to push through all five reforms at the same time — no one runs a nation that way, that no one deals with reform that way.
Implementing reforms that way only has a negative effect on reform momentum.
National leaders worldwide — including in the US and China — all suffer from the same disease: They are obstinate, self-opinionated, arrogant, convinced of their own excellence and think that honest advice is jarring on the ear. Anyone who wants to succeed must avoid these shortcomings.
Reform is not easy, but changing a leader’s thinking and character is even more difficult. Only giving up preconceived notions will lead to new possibilities — only listening to honest advice will lead to a road forward. Without this approach, mistakes will be repeated and defeat will be certain. This is honest advice — I wonder if anyone is listening.
Chuang Sheng-rong is a lawyer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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