The opposition pan-blue camp has called for an electoral recount and an investigation of the March 19 shooting incident, demands to which President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) have responded with the utmost sincerity and substantive action. But it appears that no amount of goodwill and effort will appease the bitter feelings of the losers, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜).
Given that Lien and Soong were upholders of this country's authoritarian past, it is not surprising that they are unwilling to accept the results of a fairly contested election. Chen's re-election dashed their hopes of returning to power and proved that the democratic reforms promoted by the DPP are here to stay.
Nevertheless, since we of the pan-green camp recognize that this election was indeed an extremely tight race, we have fully respected their right to a legal recount and have further agreed to statutory revisions for an administrative recount.
A comprehensive and transparent investigation of the shooting is under way, and the DPP has already met the opposition's de-mand that foreign forensic experts participate in this investigation. That such an act of violence occurred on the election's eve was a terrible shock and a day of sadness for the nation, for we had prided ourselves on the peaceful nature of Taiwan's democratic tran-sition. More than anyone else, the president is eager to find out the truth behind the attempted assassination.
Yet because Lien refuses to accept his defeat, what could have been a further step in Taiwan's democratic consolidation has turned out to be its biggest test.
A strong democracy requires that the general population possess a basic confidence in government institutions' legitimacy and soundness. Even though his claims completely lack evidence, Lien appears determined to undermine both the election's legitimacy and trust in the government. During one of modern history's longest periods of martial law it was Lien's KMT that fostered a sense of distrust in government among the Taiwanese people. Ironically, with the help of melodrama, hearsay and mass media, Lien is now able to capitalize on these lingering sentiments.
The KMT is known for its history of human rights violations and authoritarian rule, whereas the DPP has been at the forefront of Taiwan's democratic movement. When we were Taiwan's only opposition party, we fought in numerous unfair elections rigged by the KMT. To accuse us of election fraud is a grave insult to those who have dedicated their lives to and even sacrificed their lives for democracy.
Democracy also requires mature political leaders and parties. As the vote was tallied on the evening of March 20, Lien chose to incite crowds with a fiery, bitter speech. Meanwhile, the president expressed his highest respect for Lien, and urged supporters to cast aside political differences and embrace the pan-blue camp. While the blue camp organized mass protests and stormed government buildings, the DPP urged supporters to exercise restraint and strictly forbade local party branches from organizing any confrontational activities. On the weekend of April 10, as the pan-blue camp continued with demonstrations that ended in violence, DPP delegates met to reform our party mechanisms for nominating candidates.
It is obvious which side is committed to Taiwan's stability and ongoing democratization, and which side is merely seeking political gain at the expense of social order.
Democracy -- particularly in Taiwan's case -- requires support from the international community. China has regarded any act of democratic consolidation, from our first parliamentary election to the presidential election and recent referenda, as a move toward independence deserving political and even military suppression. Such threats to our very survival and the discrediting of democracy are not only unjust but also harmful to Asia-Pacific stability.
If one hopes for China's rapid political liberalization, then Taiwan's democracy must be allowed to flourish. Taiwan's experience has proven that democracy can be compatible with so-called Asian values, and our close cultural and economic ties with China can play a strategic liberalizing influence. It is unfortunate that the post-election controversy generated by the blue camp has been manipulated by China in an attempt to belittle Hong Kong's democratic move-ment. We must not allow the blue camp's actions to continue to harm Taiwan's international image.
It is with sadness that we have witnessed the blue camp's demon-strations turn violent. We are appalled that Lien still refuses to take responsibility for events spinning out of control, and still blames Chen and the DPP.
Recent events represent a surge of reactionary forces against the ongoing consolidation of democracy. Despite these challenges, we have faith in this country's people and democratic institutions. Having won over half of the votes, the president is in a position of strength. Polls also indicate that the public disapproves of the blue camp's actions.
As we weather this storm, we are confident that Taiwan's democracy will emerge stronger than ever before.
Hsiao Bi-khim is a legislatior and director of international affairs for the Democratic Progressive Party.
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