In the elections for the sixth Legislative Yuan last Saturday, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which enjoys an administrative advantage, and the Taiwan Solidarity Union, led by former president Lee Teng-hui (
Their responsible approach is laudable. After all, the core of democracy is "political accountability," which is exactly the fundamental principle Taiwan's politicians must learn.
Party leaders and other decision-makers must take responsibility for their parties' gains and losses in major elections. This allows an objective standard to differentiate between right and wrong within each party, and is a clear indicator of politicians' morals. Under such circumstances, those who are honest and responsible can be able to distinguish themselves from those who are thirsty for power while passing the buck in full view of the electorate.
The most prominent case is President Chen Shui-bian's (
Moreover, it is a good opportunity for the DPP, which has always claimed to love Taiwan, to make a change from the political system introduced by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), in which the party had primacy in politics. It is time for the DPP to break with the political structures of the party-state and correct the egregious error of having a president who is also party chairman. It should ensure that it is clearly stated that the presidency and party chairmanship cannot be held concurrently, so that the policies of the party, which are hidden from the voting public, are clearly separated from those of the government administration. Only in this way can the president be a "president for all the people," rather than just being a party leader.
Political parties in many advanced democratic nations serve only as election machinery, their main function being to guide public opinion during election campaigns. The bad examples set by the KMT, which has a massive party organization which allowed it to concurrently hold the presidency and the party chairmanship, should be rejected by the DPP. Despite the KMT's massive party organization, it still lost its hold on government power, and even though the DPP has a fair-sized party machinery, it still managed to be defeated in the legislative elections. Clearly a party organization is not central to winning or retaining power.
So, even as the DPP considers internal reform, it should rationalize the definition of the party's status to something more in keeping with the needs of a modern democratic country. It is important to build a political party that conforms to the spirit of demo-cracy, and the emphasis of party activity should be focused on work in the constituencies. The DPP must learn the lesson of its defeat in the legislative elections and plant the idea of responsible government deeply in the ground of Taiwan's political culture.
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