The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has suggested that the nation institute an annual “state of the nation” address delivered by the president to the legislature as part of its proposals for the new legislature. Its stated objective for the reform is to rein in the executive excesses of the president, making them more accountable to the legislature. The idea of a state of the nation address is certainly one worth exploring. It could bring some discipline to the executive branch, making its agenda more accountable.
However, if the KMT’s true intention is democratic accountability and not simply to stymie a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) president from enacting their legislative agenda, the KMT might want to also look at its own conduct in opposition. To have a functioning democracy, there needs to be a well-functioning opposition to effectively hold the government accountable, something the KMT has sorely lacked over the past decade.
Many nations have something akin to a state of the nation address delivered by the head of state on a regular or annual basis — providing the head of state with the opportunity to outline their legislative agenda in the upcoming year, talk about where they think the nation stands and the challenges it faces. In the US, this comes in the form of the State of the Union address delivered by the president to a joint session of the US Congress. In the UK, the state opening of parliament fulfills this role, whereby the sovereign delivers a speech informing the nation of the government’s legislative priorities for the new parliamentary session.
Taiwan already has something akin to a state of the nation address, and that is the annual Double Ten National Day address, delivered on Oct. 10. Like the US’ State of the Union address, the National Day address provides the president with the opportunity to take stock of where the nation is, where it is going, the challenges it faces and offer some proposals to tackle issues.
However, that address is less objective-oriented compared with that of the UK and the US, nor is it delivered in the legislature.
This is, presumably, the purpose of the KMT’s proposal — to make the president more accountable to the legislature. Benefits could certainly flow from this, as an annual presidential address to the legislature could bolster its power, making the president more accountable to it and the nation. Additionally, government organs as a whole could become more efficient, with everyone pulling in the same direction.
The KMT argues that the past eight years of DPP governance has been characterized by executive overreach riding roughshod over democracy, whereby a DPP president working with a DPP majority in legislature undermined lawmakers from being able to hold the government accountable. This is not entirely unwarranted criticism. There are certainly examples — such as the NT$800 billion (US$25.55 million) Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program — which was passed in 2017 through the legislature with minimal accountability.
However, in any democracy, for an executive to be efficiently held to account, there needs to be a properly functioning opposition. An example of this abroad is in the UK, where former leader of the opposition Jeremy Corbyn’s incompetent and divisive leadership of the Labour Party enabled the Conservative Party to ride roughshod over democratic norms in the wake of the 2016 Brexit vote.
If the KMT truly wishes to advance Taiwanese democracy and make the president more accountable and transparent, it should prioritize getting its own house in order, guided by the wishes and values of Taiwanese, not its China-leaning elite. No democracy can work well with such a dysfunctional opposition so divided and estranged from the nation.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS