Following President Chen Shui-bian's (
However, any pan-blue move to conduct a vote of no confidence in the Cabinet would lead to a dissolution of the legislature, and so we are now entering a temporary balance of terror between the pan-blue and pan-green forces. It remains to be seen how the two opposing camps will strategically place themselves in relation to the other side. Will the pan-blues really push for a no confidence vote against Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌)? And will the pan-greens then support a decision by the president to dissolve the legislature and hold new legislative elections?
The pan-green camp says that so long as there is no vote of no confidence in the Cabinet, then the legislature will not be dissolved, and the more the pan-blues push for a no confidence vote, the more certain it is that the legislature will be dissolved.
The pan-blues, however, think the reverse is true. That is, the pan-blues believe that the pan-greens are so fearful of a crushing defeat in a fresh round of legislative elections that they will not dare run the risk of asking the president to dissolve the legislature. The risk that the pan-blues are running is that the pan-green camp really is determined to dissolve the legislature at any cost.
Have the pan-blues then prepared themselves for the ensuing legislative elections? More importantly, even if the pan-blue camp is right about the green camp's fears, will the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) accept Chen's decision if he nominates Ma to the premiership?
If the pan-greens are sensible, they should understand that they cannot afford to face new legislative elections, because the electorate is no longer on their side. However, according to the Constitution and constitutional precedents set by other nations, the outgoing Cabinet can stay on as a caretaker Cabinet led by the incumbent premier or vice premier, a situation that prevails until the new Cabinet is appointed.
In other words, if the pan-blues successfully topple the Cabinet, they would actually help the pan-greens take advantage of this constitutional opportunity -- they could simply refrain from nominating a premier from either the pan-blue or pan-green camps. If that happens, the pan-green camp will formally be off the hook, while the pan-blues will end up being blamed for staging a political campaign to usurp power. They will not be able to form a Cabinet, and may even lose their support in future elections.
If the president dissolves the legislature following a successful no confidence vote, then new legislative elections will have to be convened within 60 days. Although the pan-greens run the risk of being routed in the ensuing legislative elections, a new round of elections will also catch the pan-blues off guard. The process of redrawing the nation's electoral districts has not been completed yet and any confusion during the campaign will reflect badly on the pan-blues.
The Constitution also allows Chen to submit a request to the Council of Grand Justices to deliver an interpretation of whether the legislature elected following a dissolution is a genuinely "new" legislature (ie, the seventh) or an "interim" legislature, to be retained until the seventh legislature is elected as planned late next year. If the latter, then the pan-blue camp, which might do well in the short term, could face a backlash in the legislative and presidential elections next year and the year after.
Chen Chao-chien is an assistant professor in the department of public affairs at Ming Chuan University.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
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