The legislative elections have ensured that the government will continue to struggle to find support from lawmakers. The victorious pan-blue camp has demanded that Deputy Legislative Speaker Chiang Pin-kun (江丙坤) be appointed premier. Under the current constitutional system, trying to imitate France's cohabitation government is likely to precipitate a constitutional crisis. To end the political gridlock of the last four years, government and opposition leaders must replace confrontation with communication.
The Constitution states that the premier is a presidential appointment and does not require the consent of the Legislative Yuan. But because Taiwan's constitutional system is similar to France's semi-presidential system, considerations of political strength suggest that the current situation seems to offer an opportunity for a government of cohabitation.
Over the last four years, there were at least three opportunities for a "cohabitation" government to be formed. The first was when President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) first won office in 2000 and appointed Tang Fei (唐飛) as premier, but the pan-blue camp, then enjoying a two-thirds majority, was not enthusiastic. The second was after the last legislative elections in 2001, when the pan-blue camp held onto its majority despite significant losses. The third was after this year's presidential elections, when, despite all of the tension, the pan-blue camp did not demand that Chen relinquish his right to appoint the premier. Having wasted three opportunities to push for cohabitation, the demands of the pan-blue camp at this juncture seem questionable.
If the pan-blue camp attempts to install a premier and push for a vote of no-confidence against the Cabinet, then Chen will dissolve the legislature and call new elections. If the opposition manages to retain a majority in the resulting poll, Chen will be under tremendous pressure to face the political reality and negotiate a blue-camp premier. However, a new election would be deemed a huge waste of time and money. It would be difficult to secure public support for this, and newly elected lawmakers would not be too willing to see another election either. So it's unlikely to happen.
The pan-blue camp has a 13-seat majority over the pan-green camp in the legislature, not counting the 10 independents. Nevertheless, cooperation between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) has its own limits, and from what Soong had to say on Sunday -- "the PFP will go its own way, and will not play second fiddle to the KMT; the door to [merger] negotiations with the KMT has already been shut" -- a merger between the two parties is not likely, and even simple cooperation could pose difficulties. Soong's words imply that political boundaries separating the pro-China parties are no longer so clear-cut, and that an era of political maneuvering and realignment is set to begin. If the KMT views PFP support as a given and challenges Chen for the right to choose the premier, they could be making a serious error with troubling consequences.
The people have spoken; what they seek is stability. Political parties should realize that a win-win model of cooperation is mutually beneficial. Chen should bring together leaders from the major parties for a frank exchange of ideas and compromise if necessary to find solutions all can accept. This nation requires stability and harmony, and it is sick to death of destructive political conflict. Everyone should take heed.
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