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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS