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.
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