Chen deserves to win
I refer to the article "Foreign journalists to flock to Taiwan" (Friday, March 5, page 4).
It is no surprise that foreign journalists and news organizations are keen to report on the presidential election. Beyond the historic referendum to be carried out on March 20, the fact is that the choice of Taiwanese voters on that day will have a huge impact on the world in general.
It is no exaggeration to state that after the events which occurred in the past four years, a victory for Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Five key factors point to a win by President Chen Shui-bian (
Unlike Lien, Chen grew up with a humble background, and that certainly speaks of his ability to empathize with the less fortunate in society. Lien and Soong have been embroiled in financial scandals, which have yet to be resolved. Also, at the age of 68, is Lien able to relate to the feelings and aspirations of the younger, modern Taiwanese? Chen is only 53. Lien has also frequently modified his views and actions over the past few years. From supporting the view of "special state-to-state relations between Taiwan and China," as espoused by his former party chairman Lee in 1999, Lien has now indicated that he would prefer a peaceful reunification of the two countries. The Chen-Lu partnership has worked considerably well for the past four years, and will a Lien-Soong partnership work as well, given that in 2000, they launched ferocious attacks on each other?
While economic growth in the country has not been as ideal as in the 1990s, voters should note that Taiwan has enjoyed a better economic growth rate than the EU and Japan, with a lower unemployment rate than Hong Kong and the EU. The World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Report also ranked Taiwan as fifth in the world and first in Asia last year.
The fact that 500,000 people participated in a mass demonstration of protest against the administration of Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
While blame for the lack of economic growth in Hong Kong since 1997 could be attributed to the 1997 financial crisis, Sept. 11 or SARS, Taiwanese have seen how Hong Kong has not developed more freely in terms of individual freedom since 1997.
Despite China's lack of aggressive threats this time round, other issues such as China's opposition to Taiwan's joining the World Health Organization, especially with memories of the SARS outbreak a year ago, have irked and upset many Taiwanese and international observers, that instead of it being purely a medical and social issue, the Chinese have turned it into a political issue.
Lee has been widely regarded as the founding father of democracy and economic development in Taiwan. It is probably no exaggeration to say that Lee is probably regarded in Taiwan what Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀) is to Singapore or what Mahathir Mohamad is to Malaysia. Would voters want to see Lee's fight for democracy disappear overnight?
The presidential election will shape Taiwan in the coming years.
On paper, both Lien and Chen have the experience and potential of ruling the country, with the former having served as premier and vice president from 1993 to 2000, and the latter having served as Taipei mayor and president.
The key factor is, "Which candidate would safeguard the interests of Taiwanese in the years ahead?"
As a foreign observer, I have to state categorically that only with a Chen victory could Taiwanese remain optimistic about the future.
A Lien victory would only spell "reverse development" for Taiwan. And that would indeed be a shame, considering the efforts of Lee and Chen to build Taiwan on a forward platform. I believe many neutral observers share the same thoughts. Ultimately, the destiny of Taiwan lies in the hands of the voters, who I think will make the right and only choice -- that is to vote for Chen. A victory for Chen equates to a victory for Taiwan.
Jason Lee Boon Hong
Singapore
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS