Seeing the nation's overheated political scene starting to cool down is a good thing. A positive atmosphere for cross-party negotiation and cooperation is beginning to emerge. Since the overall blue-green division of the political map has pretty much settled, interparty bickering is not going to change anything. Nor should the parties seek to mobilize their supporters. It is time for them to sit down and talk.
Democratic politics are essentially all about negotiation, persuasion and reconciliation. Under a Cabinet system, the result is often a coalition government. At first, it is difficult to work with people with different ideas and tolerate different opinions, but doing this is the first step toward a democratic culture.
In the early 1990s, Japan's Liberal Democratic Party lost its hold on power and was forced to form a coalition government with the Democratic Socialist Party. Since they upheld totally different ideals, the coalition was dubbed a yagou, a term used to refer to an illicit intimate relationship. The coalition did not last long but the Japanese people benefited from it and it also shook up Japan's factional politics.
In this country, the governing and opposition parties do not differ significantly over social and economic policies. It is only on cross-strait relations that they do not see eye to eye. Ultimately, their similarities are greater than their differences. But during the elections, each side either exaggerated or distorted their opponent's propositions. As a consequence of the media's frenzied over-interpretation, the basically identical electoral propositions soon deteriorated into a war between good and evil.
Now many people have proposed that leaders of political parties meet, with the meetings televised so the whole process is transparent. It is easier to talk through misunderstandings and solve differences when we are calm. But faced with the TV cameras, people often change their attitudes or posture. Without a basic sense of mutual trust, all meetings will be meaningless.
Some might assume that the cooperation between the governing and the opposition parties is no more than a division of political spoils, bribery, treachery and betrayal. This kind of thinking is the product of authoritarian government. In a democracy, the cooperation between the governing and the opposition parties is necessary and normal. Cooperation over policy makes a country operate on the right track of democracy. This is something we have to learn.
The last two presidential and legislative elections fueled animosity between President Chen Shui-bian (
Better relations between the government and opposition will help improve ethnic harmony as well as cross-strait relations. Over the past four years, the feuds between Chen, Lee, Lien and Soong have aggravated ideological issues and ethnic tensions.
People followed the lead of these politicians blindly and became inextricably tangled up in the conflicts. Fortunately, the political fervor is now starting to cool down. It is a good time for us to come to our senses.
The first cooperation between the ruling and the opposition parties may look like a yagou. Some are afraid it is all a set-up, while others fear their reputations will be tarnished. If the parties cooperate over policy only, then personalities will not be an issue. If Taiwan wants to stay on the road of democracy, then cross-party cooperation will be a step in the right direction.
Antonio Chiang is a former deputy secretary-general of the National Security Council.
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS