Not long ago, Vice President and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate William Lai (賴清德) published an article titled “My Plan to Preserve Peace in the Taiwan Strait” in the Wall Street Journal, proposing a “four-pillar plan” for peace and prosperity — including bolstering Taiwan’s military deterrence, treating economic security as national security, developing partnerships with the world’s democracies, and steady and principled cross-strait leadership.
The four pillars’ careful arguments are straightforward and show Lai’s stature, while highlighting the major drawbacks of other candidates who lack the core ideas of national development.
The four pillars are a clear discourse on the key issues in Taiwan. Whether the nation should enhance its defense deterrence is an issue that the presidential candidates cannot avoid talking about. They should make it clear whether they want to support the country’s domestic manufacture of submarines, national defense autonomy and strengthening defense capabilities.
Also, they should make it clear whether to support extending the mandatory military service from four months to one year. They should not first claim to resume the short-term four-month service, then use the premise of cross-strait peace for resuming the service. If they try to avoid the problem in this way, voters can see through their tricks.
As Lai made a clear statement on economic security and partnerships with the world’s democracies, other candidates should also state their positions on these matters and whether they want to continue to rely on China economically.
A steady and principled leadership to cross-strait relations is perhaps the Achilles’ heel of other candidates. Compared with their wavering discourses on cross-strait policies, Lai’s clear stance provides voters with an explicit reference to make a choice.
The presidential election is not a child’s game and it is a candidate’s commitment to his national development vision. Each candidate must present their own policies and state where they want to lead the country. They should not aim to fool voters with election slogans calling for the DPP to be “pulled off the shelves” or the formation of a great opposition alliance. For the majority of voters, the presidential election is neither a feud nor a confrontation full of hatred among local factions.
Those running for president must have a clear plan and vision for national development and tell voters which direction they would lead Taiwan, so voters can choose accordingly. If they curry favor with a specific ethnic group, ally with other candidates and only focus on trivia during their campaign, they would be putting the cart before the horse.
Recently, Lai also proposed an annual subsidy plan for students attending private universities. This does not involve unification or independence and has nothing to do with whether you are blue or green, as it simply takes young people’s future into consideration. Other candidates not only fail to propose similar policies, but they also criticize Lai for spending taxpayers’ money just to attract votes. They try to stimulate voters’ anger without discussing the subsidy completely.
As of today, Lai has already shaped his discourse, showing his attitude toward the presidency. Hopefully, other candidates would follow up quickly and make their discourse clear and definite.
Wang Chih-chien is a distinguished professor at National Taipei University’s Graduate Institute of Information Management.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval