Yesterday's Double Ten Day marked the sixth National Day since the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) came to power in 2000. In his address, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) told the nation, "We may say that the new government formed in 2000 was born to carry out reforms and that it exists to realize fairness and social justice. These missions represent the most solemn mandate from the 23 million people of Taiwan, and they embody the true meaning of the historic transfer of power between political parties."
Chen is right. After almost 50 years of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) rule, the DPP was elected because the Taiwanese hoped that it could replace the KMT's corrupt government with a cleaner one and bring a new vision to the nation.
Unfortunately, the DPP seems to have run out of steam. It faces a swelling tide of criticism, mostly focusing on Chen's changeable China policy and his failure to achieve major political and economic reforms. He has made a number of inappropriate appointments, and the deadlock between the governing and opposition camps remains unresolved. As a result, support for the government has plunged.
The government's predicament is due to a number of factors, but the biggest problem is a lack of clear direction on major policies. For example, despite China's military threat, Chen failed to condemn trips to China earlier this year by opposition leaders. On the contrary, he even asked People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (
Moreover, the DPP is stuck at the stage of appointing people as a reward for their campaign contributions rather than on merit. This has created a culture of political sycophancy, and it is only natural that such officials will not enjoy high public esteem. After all, government is about effectively implementing policy and opening up new horizons -- not missions that any old party hack is equipped to carry out. Some of these people may even be tainted by involvement with financial organizations.
The DPP must therefore broaden the avenues through which it makes appointments. It can no longer confine itself to thinking only about what is advantageous to the party. Otherwise there will be a dearth of talent within the government, and this will give the opposition even more scope to boycott government policies.
When the DPP was elected, many hoped that it would eliminate the corrupt practices that were such a routine part of KMT rule. Now, the DPP faces scandals over corruption within the Financial Supervisory Commission and the hiring of Thai laborers to work on the Kaohsiung MRT. The party's motto, "With the green camp in power, quality is guaranteed," is now being questioned.
The public is calling for the government to harshly punish those implicated in corruption, regardless of their status or position. Chen himself affirmed this goal yesterday. Hopefully he means what he says, and will prod his party to judge such cases by the highest ethical standards. He must at all costs avoid following the KMT's example of whitewashing such incidents. For if he does, the people of Taiwan will lose faith in him.
The DPP should cherish the high expectations that ordinary people have for a home-grown party, and foster an image of working for the people. The drop in support for the DPP is a crisis -- but it is also an opportunity for the party to correct its faults.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS