The presidential election and referendum have finished, and the Central Election Commission has proclaimed President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) as the win-ners. Unfortunately, the referendum did not succeed since the two questions failed to achieve the 50 percent vote required. The tiny margin by which the election was won prompted Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chair-man Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) to refuse to concede, calling for an immediate recount and the annulment of the election.
Governments around the world have already offered their congratulations, and this is to be seen as a victory for democracy. However, because a number of losers are refusing to play by the rules, a blow has been struck against Taiwanese democracy. These politicians have continued to protest, inciting social unrest and causing the stock market to fall. One wonders what the pan-blue supporters in the business world are thinking, having witnessed this turn of events.
With an eye on the year-end legislative elections, some pan-blue legislators have not only failed to encourage their supporters to be reasonable, but they have actively encouraged them to do decidedly unreasonable acts.
The road to democracy has not been an easy one, and through the actions of a few individuals over the last few days Taiwan's good name in the international community has been compromised. The legal authorities have already had the ballot boxes sealed and promised to promptly deal with Lien's and Soong's demands. Now that the furore surrounding the election is being dealt with through legal channels, the pan-blue politicians should desist from their current course, call off the protests and allow society to get back to normal.
The media has also come out of this election tarnished. We have seen huge disparities between the pre-election surveys and the exit polls conducted by a number of newspapers and TV stations and the actual outcome. These media have now lost all credibility. Furthermore, many commentators and media personalities overlooked the fact that a great number of people refused to participate in pre-election polls. In the end there appeared to be little relationship between the results of these polls and the final count. Why did so many people refuse to participate? Was it perhaps that the readers and viewers saw the surveys as fundamentally biased towards certain political parties, and therefore refused to take part in them?
The aftermath of the election will see a change in the political landscape. Lien will have to step down as KMT chairman to make way for new blood. If the KMT wishes to be a viable force four years from now, its leaders will have to cease turning their back on mainstream public opinion and recognize Taiwan. Failure to do so will result in a split between the various factions within the party. It is unlikely that the KMT and the PFP will join forces in the year-end legislative elections: their competitive spirit will surely smother their desire to co-operate.
Beijing may well have been disappointed by the news of another term for Chen, but the situation should nevertheless have a stabilizing and positive influence on Sino-Taiwanese relations. They will be reluctant to wait another four years for a possible handover of power, opting instead for dialogue with the powers-that-be, and no longer expect the president to accept the "one China" principle. It is hoped that the international community will take the mainstream will of the Taiwanese people seriously, recognize the fact that 60 percent of the people identify themselves as Taiwanese and want to be the masters of Taiwan, and amend their current "one China" policy.
Parris Chang is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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