Twelve years after direct presidential elections were introduced here, the first-ever presidential debate will be held this afternoon. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
The debate is both historically significant and politically necessary. It opens an arena where no false allegations, finger pointing or war of words can dominate -- one where both candidates can elaborate on their vision and policies in a more rational and practical way.
From now on, voters will be able to insist that a candidate spell out his or her program and vision so they can choose a candidate to fulfill a specific mandate. Issues and messages are more effective than image building in attracting votes. Candidates also need to show their ability to resolve problems by seeing the other side's point of view.
What should be expected from the debate? At least three issues must be addressed: national identity, political institutionalization and a feasible vision for the future of this nation.
An incumbent almost always carries more burdens than his or her challengers. While pursuing plans to hold a referendum and write a new constitution, Chen must persuade voters of the extent to which he can tackle both internal and external pressures. His insistence on independent sovereignty has consolidated the notion of Taiwanese consciousness. How to further deepen democracy without bringing the nation to the brink of crisis is one of his challenges.
For Lien, his life-long embrace of the "one China" principle and his failure to distance himself from Beijing's implicit endorsement have created troubles for the pan-blue camp.
Lien will have to explain how he would protect national security as part of his pledge to immediately open direct links if he is elected. Can he carry out his agenda without accepting Beijing's "one China" precondition? Does he include "independence" as one of the options for future cross-strait relations? Those are questions that cannot be left unanswered.
One of the greatest tasks facing the next president is how to institutionalize the democratic system. Chen has outlined a blueprint for writing a new constitution and institutionalizing clean politics. Such attempts would bypass the lengthy -- and often impractical -- tradition procedures for constitutional reform. The question is to what extent he can ensure that his alternative process will be smooth and peaceful. Chen must also present a defense against the opposition's accusations that his administration is tainted by "black gold."
As a long-time KMT member and official, Lien must come clean about both the party's "black gold" history and his own. He cannot simply try to pass the blame on to former president Lee Teng-hui (
Both Chen and Lien have issued many "electoral checks" -- promises -- to voters. Can all or even some of these checks be cashed and, if so, at what cost? Where are the financial resources to support all the proposed social-welfare projects? How do they propose Taiwan transform itself in the face of globalization and the rise of China's economic and political clout?
The voters deserve fair and workable answers. The future of the nation depends upon it.
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