While the opposition is still obsessed with de-legitimizing President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) presidential election victory, Chen and his ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) have their eyes on the year-end legislative election. In the past couple of weeks, Chen launched a series of decisive moves with an aim to lay a solid foundation for DPP rule.
Chen first started a transition of power by introducing new party elites into the Cabinet reshuffle. With new blood injected into the government structure, Chen successfully opened an arena for cultivating party elites.
His second step was to activate a strategy for DPP nomination rules and stepping up cooperation with the DPP's partner, the Taiwan Solidarity Union, to make sure the pan-green force could secure a majority in the next Legislative Yuan. A de facto majority will pave the way for Chen's implementation of reforms and clear the obstructionism from the pan-blue opposition force.
Chen's rejuvenation of his own party and his determination to gain another victory in the national legislature will greatly influence Taiwan's political landscape and the potential party realignment.
In his first term, Chen was virtually handicapped by the pan-blue opposition. After his hard-won re-election and an emerging power struggle within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), Chen is in an even better position in terms of enlarging his support base.
Having won a majority vote in the presidential election, Chen must strengthen his ties with the opposition party..
So how would Chen reach across the lines to the legislators of the opposition party? The old way was through pork and patronage. These techniques might still work if the Chen administration could accelerate its sale of the New Ten Construction Projects to local governments. With pressure from the rank and file to improve regional development, opposition legislators would not dare to block the government's proposal.
Another strategy is to appeal to ideological sentiment. While ideology always plays a role in how legislators behave, most are more interested in achieving something, getting re-elected and moving ahead. Some KMT legislators from the south have been complaining about their party's failure to embrace the mainstream "Taiwanese consciousness" during the presidential election. If they were to compete with candidates from the pan-green camp, they would have no choice but to echo Chen's ideo-logy of "Taiwan first."
Chen must act like a political consultant or advisor to the legislators on the other side of the partisan divide. He needs to educate them on the likely gains they will score if they cross party lines on a particular vote. He needs to explain to legislators of the opposition parties why his views make sense in the electoral arithmetic of his district.
But beyond political opportunism and self-interest lies an even more potent appeal: power-sharing. A party realignment in Taiwan after the December election is highly likely. To create an image as a "bargaining president," Chen should incorporate elites from the opposition camp into the government.
When the executive opens his doors and lets a member of the other party into the decision-making councils, it leaves more incentives for opposition legislators to defect to the DPP. In real politics, few people can resist the temptation or the appeal of relevance and power.
As the KMT leadership still resists the internal call for a power transition and democratic decision-making, it opens a gate for party realignment in Taiwanese politics in the near future.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS