With the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral elections over, discussions and rumors about the upcoming presidential election in 2004 have begun to fill the air. The KMT and the PFP are working to build a coalition, while the DPP has adopted a low-key approach, hoping that its administrative achievements will enable the party to meet the challenge from the opposition parties. Following the mayoral elections, President Chen Shui-bian (
He will certainly feel that the decisive factor in the presidential election will be neither candidate pairings nor coalitions of parties. Rather, it will be who the public regards as a national leader who can create an environment in which the people can live in peace and enjoy their work.
The new leader must be able to bring Taiwan out of the economic slump, promote declining industries and substantially lower the unemployment rate. Chen hasn't got much time left in his term of office. He is in a race against time to overcome the difficult problems facing the country so that he can present himself as a re-electable leader.
Recently, some people have argued that Chen should give up seeking a second term, so that he can concentrate on the economy and reform. By giving up the intention to seek re-election, Chen would be able to discard many of his problems and devote himself to the country's economy for the one-and-a-half years remaining of his term, the argument goes.
Those who recommend this give the example of South Korea's president. Because the South Korean president can only serve a single, five-year term, they believe he or she can concentrate on government affairs without worrying about re-election. They think Chen could do this voluntarily. But we think Chen is under no obligation to give up seeking a second term.
Besides, the administrative achievements of Chen should be examined by the voters, and no one else should impose their opinion. The spirit of the Constitution, under which the president may seek a second term, should not be altered.
Nevertheless, we still believe that Chen should devote the remainder of his term to government affairs instead of focusing on votes. Nor should he distort the direction of national economic development and reform because of electoral concerns. It is important for Chen to note that there is no need to worry about losing votes if his achievements can gain general acceptance from voters.
In fact, many of the policy difficulties over the past two years originated in the Legislative Yuan. After the DPP came to power in 2000, the first blow to the economy was the reduction in working hours. At the time, the executive branch, industry and labor groups had already reached an agreement to reduce the working week from 48 hours to 44 hours and make work schedules more flexible. But the legislature insisted on implementing the 84-hour-per-fortnight measure, reducing Taiwan's working week to an average of 42 hours without flexible work schedules.
As a result, not only did industrial labor costs increase dramatically, but arranging work shifts became more difficult, making it impossible to improve operational efficiency. The government, labor groups and other parties finally reached another consensus on increasing the flexibility of work schedules at last year's Economic Development Advisory Conference (EDAC). More than a year has passed, however, and only recently did the legislature pass measures on schedule flexibility.
Next, the executive branch last year proposed a NT$110 billion plan to expand public investment. But this budget plan was seriously cut down by the legislature, undermining its effectiveness. Last year, Taiwan's exports fell sharply because of the international economic downturn, causing the economy to contract and unemployment to rise.
Perhaps the situation would not have been so bad had the NT$110 billion plan been passed. The privatization of Taiwan's state-owned enterprises -- long advocated by the former KMT government -- has made negligible progress because of the Legislature's unreasonable restrictions on conditions and timetables.
These examples show that without the legislature's cooperation, Chen cannot improve government efficiency even if he gives up his re-election bid. If Taiwan's economic crisis is to be solved, the most urgent task is not resolving the question of whether Chen should give up his re-election bid, but rather to push for cooperation between government and opposition in the Legislative Yuan for the sake of national interests.
Besides, an announcement from Chen that he is not seeking a second term may have serious consequences. In other countries, presidents who do not seek re-election usually become "lame ducks" later in their presidencies and are therefore unable to push policies forward. With the severe economic, political and military challenges facing Taiwan today, the incumbent president may immediately become a lame duck if he does not seek a second term. There are several reasons why this would be extremely disadvantageous to the nation.
First, an incumbent president not seeking re-election would lose authority within the ruling party. Once the battle for succession begins, the ruling party will immediately face the risk of internal collapse. Given the ruling party's minority status in the Legislative Yuan, and given the deliberate boycotts of the opposition parties, gaining cooperation from the legislature for policies will become even more difficult.
Next, if the incumbent president does not seek re-election, then the public will become doubtful about the continuity of current policies. This will lead to an increase in uncertainty about policies as well as difficulties in getting them implemented.
Finally, if the incumbent president does not seek re-election, the civil service system may become lackluster in its policy implementation. This all goes to show that for a president to not seek re-election is not the proper way to improve policy results.
To avoid spending too much time planning the upcoming election, our suggestion to Chen is not that he give up his re-election bid, but that he concentrate on policy implementation. On a deeper level, this is also the best election strategy.
Democratic politics is all about holding regular elections. Only with constant competition can ruling and opposition parties improve. What political commentators should pay attention to is whether either side is using methods that are unreasonable or detrimental to the nation's interests. Asking the president to give up seeking re-election has nothing to do with seeking harmony. Even if a minority believes the state leadership is incompetent, it is not a reasonable suggestion that the president should refrain from seeking re-election.
Chen has every reason to seek re-election, but he must also observe the difficulties facing the people, formulate better policies acceptable to a majority of the people and work to realize them so as to set the country in the right direction.
Translated by Grace Shaw, Eddy Chang and Francis Huang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS