The presidential election was a competitive three-way race, of which Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Vice President William Lai (賴清德) became the winner. However, Lai received only 40.05 percent of the total votes and the DPP did not win the majority of legislative seats. In other words, to carry out its agendas, the DPP would need the support of opposition parties. First and foremost, they must reach a consensus concerning the cross-strait relationship.
Due to their different pasts, the pan-blue and pan-green camps see China differently and it is only natural that their political strategies and cross-strait policies differ. Over the past few decades, both sides have focused on political struggles, demonizing the other without seeing common ground. Consequently, an agreement is hardly attainable, solidarity cannot be established and Taiwan’s ability to confront China is weakened.
A consensus could and should be achieved. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is more oriented toward China, whereas the DPP wants to keep its distance from Beijing. Yet both parties and their supporters want to maintain freedom and democracy as a way of life, insisting on the Republic of China’s sovereignty and refusing to be “unified” with China. This is the fundamental ground on which Taiwanese stand together in the face of China.
The KMT and the DPP should seek the greatest common denominator under the banners of “democratic coexistence” and “solidarity co-living.”
The value of “democratic coexistence” must be upheld and the key is to underscore the two parties’ similarities. Given that the KMT and the DPP would defend Taiwan’s democracy, they should collaborate based on the principle of democratic coexistence while fending off China’s efforts to change the “status quo.” The two parties should avoid labeling each other as China’s “fellow traveler” that betrays Taiwan or stigmatizing Taiwanese independence as “toxic.” Only in doing so could the parties reach an agreement on cross-strait policy and enhance the nation’s solidarity to withstand China. Every political party should realize the importance of coopereation to gain more leverage, so that Taiwan’s voice in the international community could be amplified and its legitimacy consolidated.
In this sense, the differences between the two parties’ policies should be minimized to achieve “solidarity co-living.” Once the KMT and the DPP are willing to respect each other in a democracy, both sides could compromise on their strategic differences. The DPP should make an effort to understand KMT supporters’ “long-distance Chinese nationalism” and revise its cross-strait policy accordingly in a flexible, realistic manner. This would strengthen the DPP’s agenda of maintaining the “status quo” of the Republic of China in Taiwan. The KMT should also make an effort to respect the DPP’s past, based on which the DPP and its supporters affirm Taiwan’s autonomy and sovereignty. In this sense, maintenance of the “status quo” of the Republic of China in Taiwan should be the core of the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Undeniably, Taiwanese have developed a national consciousness. The majority, regardless of pan-blue or pan-green camp affiliation, do not want to be a part of China — a reality Beijing fails to recognize. In facing China, all Taiwan’s political parties should seek common ground despite their differences. With solidarity established, Taiwan’s democratic values and strategic location could be fully utilized to resolve unfavorable situations. In doing so, Taiwan would be able to request that China change and establish a stable relationship across the Taiwan Strait. It is hoped that president-elect Lai would work toward such a future, leading Taiwan forward.
Michael Lin is a retired diplomat who served in the US.
Translated by Emma Liu
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS