President Chen Shui-bian's (
On the night of the election, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Lien's astonishing remarks raised the curtain once again. Since the night of March 20, pan-blue supporters have massed in front of the Presidential Office, demanding a recount and the truth behind the shooting incident.
Remembering that supporters of People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Lien's demand for a recount is not unreasonable, given that according to the official tally he lost by so few votes. And because Lien's call for a recount stands on the solid ground of law, the Taiwan High Court has ordered that all ballot boxes be sealed nationwide. But now that Lien's lawsuits are being processed, there is little else to do but wait for the machinery of the legal process to settle the election dispute.
If, on the other hand, we let emotion override reason, the problem will remain unresolved.
A tiny margin is, after all, an undeniable difference. The rules of democratic politics are not set by a single party alone. For example, the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Law (
Each party within a democracy is obliged to accept election results. One cannot refuse to accept the outcome just because one believes that the the election was unfair.
In light of this, the fact that Lien and Soong have led supporters to march to the Presidential Office, called for their supporters to congregate and protest in violation of the Assembly and Parade Law (集會遊行法) -- which was enacted by the pan-blue-dominated legislature -- and have shown no regard for Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (馬英九) repeated appeals for the crowds to disperse, makes one feel that they are letting their emotions get the better of them.
I am afraid that the majority of voters in Taiwan will not find this acceptable.
The pan-blue camp is willing to resort to legal means, demanding a recount and the sealing of ballot boxes and vowing to file a lawsuit to have the election annulled -- so why are they incapable of obeying the Assembly and Parade Law? If Lien and Soong abide by the law only insofar as it suits them, how can we expect them to rule this nation by law? How can they justify their demands?
The gravity of the problem goes way beyond this. The political gatherings over the past few days have come dangerously close to rupturing ethnic harmony.
Chen's re-election bid was endorsed by at least half of the electorate. A handful of politicians can refuse to recognize his victory but they must not brand him a liar or demand that he step down. Is doing so conducive to social stability?
The election result reveals overwhelming support for the pan-blue camp in northern Taiwan and support for the pan-green camp in the south. This phenomenon only reflects the differences in politics and culture between the north and south. But a handful of politicians have openly suggested that the north and south separate and build their own nations. Is this conducive to ethnic harmony?
Even before all the facts about the assassination attempt on Chen could be determined, they boldly asserted that it was a staged drama in a dirty election. Is this rational?
Despite demanding that their supporters remain rational and peaceful, they are stirring up people's emotions, wanting them to carry out a long-term fight amid wind and rain. Is this how responsible political leaders should behave?
Lien's not delivering a concession speech was understandable, even though it demonstrated a lack of democratic spirit.
Destroying partisan relations is also understandable because politics necessarily involves power struggle.
But if the pan-blue side incites people to take to the streets just because of the miniscule margin by which Chen won and lets a handful of politicians play up irresponsible issues to undermine ethnic relations, then this is unforgivable.
Some religious leaders have called for reason and mutual respect -- in direct contrast to some politicians' wild appeals and the gestures of hatred and the bloodshot eyes that we have seen on TV.
Those who love this nation and society watch with bleeding hearts.
Xiang Yang is an associate professor of indigenous languages at National Dong Hwa University.
Translated by Wang Hsiao-wen and Jackie Lin
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS