Taiwan is full of surprises, but one thing is certain: Democracy is alive and doing very well. This comes in the strangest, but not always the best ways.
On this topic, former British prime minister Winston Churchill said: “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms.”
How true.
Democracy certainly is that. It is desirable, but it is never perfect. Instead it remains a work in continuous progress. In it, voters must always be on their toes and sift information as they choose their leaders.
A clear sign of this process is the recurrent emergence of populism, the political action whereby ordinary people feel their fears and concerns have been disregarded by an established governing elite. This forces them to break from years of traditional voting patterns and seek new recourse.
Not only has populism shown its head in Taiwan, but it has also done so in the most unusual place: the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), where Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) vaulted upward from relative obscurity to become the party’s presidential candidate.
The KMT had once ruled this nation with an iron-fisted, authoritarian grip. Voting was a sham procedure where most positions and results had been lined up beforehand and followed a set hierarchy.
So how did this once top-down party with its tight one-party state come to this?
The camel ironically got his nose in the tent when the KMT was forced to accept a multiparty system in 1987. From then on, it began to lose its grip in multiple ways, both within and without the party. Factions such as the New Party rose to stress that it was losing its dominant pro-China direction; that waned.
The biggest test came in 2000, when the party should have let the more popular and charismatic James Soong (宋楚瑜) be the presidential candidate, but instead stuck with the next in line, then-vice president Lien Chan (連戰). That was the high-water mark of the old guard.
In the most recent primary, the major surprise is that none of the traditional political power families participated.
KMT Vice Chairman Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) sat this one out. Lien Chan’s son Sean (連勝文) was nowhere to be seen. KMT Chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) held on to what he had and was not risking anything more. KMT Legislator Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) reserved judgement, and former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) floated the idea of a comeback, but quickly gave that up. He sensed that his day had passed with the Sunflower movement.
Even former KMT chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), who had won the primary in 2016, only to be later replaced, decided it is more favorable to commute back and forth to China, where authoritarianism is still in vogue.
The two strongest candidates were relative outliers, Han and Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘). Even moderate former New Taipei City mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫), the only traditional candidate, fell to a weak third.
There were two other vanity candidates, former Taipei County commissioner Chou Hsi-wei (周錫瑋) and Sun Yat-sen School president Chang Ya-chung (張亞中), who put their names in just to remind people that they were still alive.
So what happened?
Churchill again quipped on democracy: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
In Taiwan, that could be rephrased as a “five-minute conversation with the average Kaohsiung voter who voted for Han.”
Populism came to Taiwan. In some ways this fell in line with several world happenings. US President Donald Trump, who lost by nearly 3 million votes, still won due to the US’ outdated electoral college system. The UK got Brexit, although many are still unsure on what that will be and when it will happen.
France on the other hand dodged the bullet when French President Emmanuel Macron beat his challenger, French National Rally leader Marine Le Pen.
In Taiwan, the KMT got the big-talking Han where it seemed voters just wanted someone new and full of promises.
However, all this also demonstrates that the 21st century has become an age of gaslighters, where those bold enough to speak nonsense can catch the attention of a fed-up populace.
However, this is not a step for the better nor do other forms of government excel.
Dictators might have their moments, but history shows that they always have trouble with succession.
In the Philippines, the economy was wrecked by former president Ferdinand Marcos, who created the fake need for martial law to ensure his dictatorship.
Mao Zedong (毛澤東) unified the People’s Republic of China, but when he died, the party members in power made sure that the Gang of Four would not replace him. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) now hopes to restore a permanent presidency, but with a lowering digital growth in economy.
North Korean leader Kim Jung-un is securely in place after he dispatched his brother and uncle, but who can replace him when he is gone?
Russian President Vladimir Putin said that he feels liberalism is obsolete, but Russia faces its own challenge. What will happen when he is gone? He is going to leave a legacy of entrenched oligarchs that will be hard to overcome.
No, the other systems do not have that much to offer in a long-term range or strategy.
So the next question for Taiwan has become: Will populism spread and continue to grow beyond the KMT?
This is what the Democratic Progressive Party needs to be concerned about, as a potential donnybrook of a presidential race is shaping up and the playing field is not yet set in stone.
Independent Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) might still throw his hat in the ring. He certainly can wonder how Han jumped from barely being elected mayor of Kaohsiung to running for president, and he can tout that he has four years more experience in a larger city where he won as an independent.
Gou might also consider running as an independent. He can tout his business experience to appeal to the populace.
The only stable option might be President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), who had a mild challenge from former premier William Lai (賴清德).
So voters must ask: What does Han’s selection mean? Is it just a changing of the guard in the KMT? Is this a wave of populism that might peak?
Do many of Han’s KMT supporters want to avoid coming up through the party’s hierarchical ranks? Do they seek a new bandwagon?
Or is the KMT still struggling with an identity crisis where voters have developed certain disgust and malaise with officials who take their loyalty for granted?
The game is afoot. China is in the wings trying to influence the elections and populism has shown its head.
Democracy is alive and well in Taiwan, but how will the voters respond? Next year’s democratic elections are proving to be a testing ground for the rest of the world to watch.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
As it has striven toward superiority in most measures of the Asian military balance, China is now ready to challenge the undersea balance of power, long dominated by the United States, a decisive advantage crucial to its ability to deter blockade and invasion of Taiwan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). America expended enormous treasure to develop the technology, logistics, training, and personnel to emerge victorious in the Cold War undersea struggle against the former Soviet Union, and to remain superior today; the US is not used to considering the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)
The annual summit of East Asia and other events around the ASEAN summit in October and November every year have become the most important gathering of leaders in the Indo-Pacific region. This year, as Laos is the chair of ASEAN, it was privileged to host all of the ministerial and summit meetings associated with ASEAN. Besides the main summit, this included the high-profile East Asia Summit, ASEAN summits with its dialogue partners and the ASEAN Plus Three Summit with China, Japan and South Korea. The events and what happens around them have changed over the past 15 years from a US-supported, ASEAN-led
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
RSS