We are thinking of running the following classified ad: "Missing: two policy platforms, one blue one green, last seen ...". That's the problem, because it's been so long since there's been any serious policy debate that we can't remember when it was last seen.
We are well aware that President Chen Shui-bian (
You have to go back a month to hear the kind of policy pledge familiar in legislative elections elsewhere -- implementation of a senior citizens' pension plan. All the rest is fluff; rousing fluff for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) faithful, but fluff all the same. Because while this newspaper agrees with and has long advocated most of what Chen has proposed, we also note that these are mostly symbolic issues. They have a lot to do with national identity, but have little to do with the day-to-day business of making Taiwan a better place to live.
Elsewhere in this newspaper, we report on the frustration felt by both environmental and women's groups. Issues close to their heart are not being addressed, and we share that frustration. Taiwan has one of the most degraded environments of any newly industrialized country, thanks to the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) shortsightedness. What can be done to rectify this? Gender equality in the workplace, too, is still far from being a reality here, despite numerous laws mandating it. There's been no talk of solving Taiwan's dire fiscal problems, no mention of industrial hollowing out, no discussion of the possibility that the "Taiwan model" of economic growth is exhausted and urgently needs a rethink.
Compared with the pan-blues, however, the DPP look like policy wonks. The only thing we have heard at any time from the blues is that a blue majority is needed in the legislature to prevent the greens from doing anything. Perhaps that is not exactly what they say, but it is certainly what their message means: "Elect us so we can prevent Chen's hotheads from getting anything done." Of course we know the blues have more pressing concerns than policy, such as how to cope with KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (
So the election campaign runs on, in a total vacuum of real policies. Perhaps that is simply because there is a broad consensus on the way the big things -- the economy, for example -- should be handled, so that all that is left to quibble about is the symbols.
There's certainly room for debate. Does Taiwan want a small government, low-tax, low-benefit kind of society, as it traditionally has had? Or does it want a high-tax, high-benefit, European-style welfare state? This cleavage is not reflected in the two camps at the moment, and more's the pity. Perhaps we simply have to wait for the defeated KMT to reinvent itself before the body politic becomes more sensible. Hopefully that day will not be too long delayed.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS