It is true that elections often drive people crazy. And when it comes to the upcoming presidential election in Taiwan, anything crazy and even illogical can happen. Politicians can simply throw away their long-time adherence to certain viewpoints and change their tune, without further exploration of what led to the about-face.
A classic example is the pan-blue camp's candidate, Lien Chan (
Lien's recent embracing of the "one country on each side" of the Taiwan Strait dictum and his inclusion of Taiwan's independence as one of the options for Taiwan's future relationship with China displayed the pan-blue camp's acceptance of main-stream opinion in Taiwan. Nevertheless, the failure to explain the rationale behind such a sudden change of heart on the issue of national identity showed Lien's lack of responsibility as a potential national leader.
While publicly embracing pragmatism and moving away from his consistent policy of unification with China, Lien admitted that he is not capable of making a decision to decide the future of both sides of the strait in this particular election. That's why he will leave the issue of cross-strait relationships to the next political generation.
Lien insisted on maintaining the status quo and opposed the idea of immediate independence. To some extent, Lien's new position on cross-strait relationships is a manifestation of the majority opinion, that is, to maintain an independent and sovereign statehood. However, the real intention here is a tactic to put aside any talk of "one China" before the March election. As Lien himself said, "it is not good campaign language at this point."
Therefore, the strategy to delay or to postpone the sovereignty issue has nothing to do with whether the issue can be solved at this moment, but rather centers on Lien's way of interpreting the so-called "1992 consensus," or the notion of "one China with individual interpretation."
Lien made two huge mistakes by incorporating this strategy. First, without elaborating on the reasons behind the change, Lien owes the voters a candid explanation of why the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) abruptly accepted the idea of independence as one of the possibilities for future cross-strait relations. Moreover, is there already consensus on this from within the pan-blue camp? Or is it simply an electoral scheme to avoid being labeled as pro-unification? Can Lien stick to such a promise once he is elected?
Second, Lien, in his shortsightedness, overlooked the need for a national leader to provide 23 million Taiwanese with a vision for future cross-strait relations. To be a responsible leader, Lien should clearly identify his position, like his counterpart Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has outlined his. The voters will make their decisions based on the policies and blueprints that the candidates offer.
A political leader should take the temperature and monitor the pulse of the times in which he lives. With humility, he must tailor his style of advocacy according to his findings. He must make sure his style matches the public's mood. The fact is, more and more people are in favor of the status quo but recognize that Taiwan is separate from China. This is the actual status quo.
The next president of this country bears the responsibility to recognize this fact.
Most importantly, the key to the future cross-strait relationship lies in the fact that the people of Taiwan have the right to decide their own destiny. Leaving such a tough question for the next generation to tackle, as Lien supports, is not something that our generation should do.
Liu Kuan-teh is a political commentator based in Taipei.
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