Yet another physical confrontation in the legislature has resulted in lawmakers from both the green and blue camps being sent to hospital. The nation's democracy seems to have regressed to resemble the "permanent Assembly" elected in China in the 1940s.
The unreasonably low status of the legislature until a dozen or so years ago meant that lawmakers lacked legitimacy, and that the government and opposition could not discuss issues in a rational manner. The result was violent confrontation each time a major bill was sent to the floor for review.
Although the legislature is now democratically elected and legitimate representation is not in question, constitutional regulations ensure that presidential and executive powers held by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are being balanced by the blue camp's legislative majority. The result is a political process paralyzed by obstruction, slowing government business to a crawl.
But despite the stalemate, the politicians must find a solution.
The 2000 US presidential election and the recent tussle over the German chancellorship were both dealt with according to the law, but in Taiwan the deep animosity between the blue and green camps means that neither wants to take a step back. When a major political conflict occurs in a healthy society, neutral groups can take on the role of arbitrators. But the vicious competition seen in many past national elections, however, means that almost all groups and individuals -- including supposedly neutral academic circles -- have been labeled either green or blue.
Establishing a national communications commission (NCC) is an important part of national media reform. The organization should represent expertise and independence, but the proposed bill is being directed by political concerns. The Cabinet insists that the premier should appoint the commission's members and direct its operations. The blue camp insists that its members should be appointed in proportion to party representation in the legislature, which would give control of the commission to the blue camp.
Neither side is willing to compromise.
The "cross-strait peace advancement" bill, however, is a constitutional disaster zone. The People First Party version of the bill aims to undermine the government and create a committee that can direct cross-strait policy over the head of the executive, bypassing both the Mainland Affairs Council and the Straits Exchange Foundation. This body could negotiate directly with China and would be authorized to sign treaties, playing a decisive role in determining policy over the "three links" and free-trade zones, and even a ceasefire agreement. This completely ignores the principle of separation of powers under the Constitution, and could easily develop into a monster.
The arms-procurement and NCC bills each raise special concerns, and these could be debated publicly. Unfortunately, the blue camp has seen fit to use its legislative majority to block a review of the arms bill.
Every Taiwanese is a partisan in this conflict between the green and blue camps, and as such no one can be found to mediate. There is no one of sufficient stature, no impartial media, and no intellectuals with adequate qualifications and credibility to arbitrate.
When the legislature itself throws out the constitutional principles of legislation, the executive must appeal to the constitutional courts.
Otherwise, the political paralysis will continue, and if the people can't stand the situation any longer, they may well use their power to punish those responsible.
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion