All of the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) worrying about the popularity of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Whatever else one wants to say about Ma, one cannot deny his skill in avoiding confrontations and ability to sell himself as a pragmatist. Whenever Ma is confronted with an issue, be it cross-strait policy or economic affairs, he backs away from ideological rhetoric and frames himself as a problem-solver.
In short, Ma is a consummate politician: He anticipates what people want to hear, and tells the public whatever keeps them satisfied.
The DPP has not shown itself to be particularly skilled in this regard, because whenever President Chen Shui-bian (
This would all be fine if most Taiwanese were die-hard independence supporters. But they are not. Despite the electoral gains that Chen made in the 2004 presidential election, there has not been a major shift in the ideological views of most Taiwanese.
Poll after poll has demonstrated that Taiwanese ultimately have a very realistic and pragmatic view about their country's relationship with China.
Taiwanese want to reap the benefits of China's growing economic clout. They want to enrich their own lives by using their industries not to make a political statement about the nation's status, but by making smart investments that will pay off in the future. For this reason, many businesspeople and investors see nothing inherently wrong with investing in China's booming economy.
This, in the end, is why the DPP need not worry about these businesspeople's fixation with China. The booming economy there will not last forever. Eventually, the rollercoaster ride will come to an end, and people will have to seek another form of amusement -- India and Southeast Asia, which the government has rightly identified as possible destinations for investors looking for the next best thing.
No matter where investors turn to once the aphrodisiac of China's economic growth starts to wear off, the point is that politicians here should take the longer view. Taiwan is not in the middle of an economic crisis, but in the throes of a political stalemate. The instability caused by these political troubles has -- and continues -- to cause problems for the nation's long-term economic outlook.
This country has inherited a deeply flawed political system rife with the vestiges of an authoritarian, one-party state. To move beyond the acrimonious impasse that now beleaguers it, Taiwan must depend on women and men of vision and leadership.
It does not need politicians who mouth platitudes and look good on television, such as Ma. He may be skilled at telling people what they want to hear, but can he deliver the ideas and difficult solutions that Taiwan needs to ensure that its democracy succeeds?
The DPP has recently gone on the offensive against Ma, saying he is all show and no substance.
This argument would carry more weight if the DPP showed itself to be a party of substantive ideas. Where are the pan-green leaders? Who in the DPP is ready to stand up and say something worth hearing, rather than just criticize their pan-blue counterparts?
There is still almost two years before the next presidential election. The time to take a stand is now.
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