President Chen Shui-bian's (
But the question is: Has the pan-blue camp really grasped the crux of the problem? Evidently not. Lien and Soong have responded to their defeat by stirring up protest by their supporters, claiming that the election was unfair and invalid. This appears on the surface to be an attempt to overturn the results of the election, but it would do not to be deceived. The real motive for the protest is to transfer responsibility for the defeat away from Lien and Soong, riding on the wave of an emotional crowd. To put it another way, the pair's stirring up of the masses is designed to ensure their survival as leaders of the pan-blue camp.
It is equally understandable how difficult the defeat was to accept given the miniscule margin of only 0.228 percentage points. But did Lien and Soong really lose by only 29,518 votes? Again, this is far from the case. They went from collectively having 60 percent of the vote in the 2000 elections to a situation where, four years down the road, they are neck and neck with the pan-green camp. Shouldn't Lien and Soong shoulder the blame for this? The two men seem to be blaming the Democratic Progressive Party and Chen for the situation, bearing none of the responsibility for themselves.
This is hardly an isolated case as far as Lien is concerned. Consider his record. Following the 2000 election defeat he placed then-KMT chairman Lee Teng-hui (
Now we have seen the loosening of the KMT's hold on their domain. For a leader to react in this way, attempting to annul the election and hide behind his supporters, seems to be resorting to desperate measures.
Despite Lien's ability to wield the loyalty of his supporters to his own advantage like this, politics is both unforgiving and brutal. His much heralded "second transition of power" has proved to be nothing but pie in the sky, but there may be worse to come.
If the pan-blues lose seats in the year-end legislative elections, exacerbating their loss of power, this will be bad news not just for Lien but for the KMT and the PFP. Could it be that there is really an invisible hand acting behind the scenes of Taiwanese history?
Chin Heng-wei is the editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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