The opposition parties' sensational campaign to recall President Chen Shui-bian (
US political scientist Dennis Wrong pithily remarked that when a politician claims to act in the public's best interest, the appropriate question to ask is, "Who really stands to benefit?" The political reality, Wrong observed, is all too often one of politicians being manipulative and concealing the fact that their actions benefit the privileged few.
The effort to oust Chen was doomed from the beginning and so is the effort to topple the Cabinet, begging the question of why the pan-blues are destabilizing society in the pursuit of an untenable agenda. In seeking to recall Chen, both Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
In turn, this begs several other questions: Who will benefit from this pan-blue agenda? Who is cashing in on the allegations leveled at Chen's family and aides? The short answer is Soong but not Ma.
Chen remains completely unscathed by the pan-blues' attempts to unseat him, and the recall motion and plans to topple the Cabinet have instead served to rally the pan-greens around their president. Ma initially opposed the recall of Chen and instead advocated a vote of no confidence in the Cabinet to take the edge off Soong's call to remove Chen, but then changed his tune to support the recall motion. Soong has not only successfully secured an admission ticket to the year-end Taipei mayoral race by proposing to oust Chen, but he has also managed to make Ma a scapegoat for opposing the no-confidence vote.
Soong has once again placed himself directly in the limelight. However, this does not mean that Soong has outperformed Ma; he has merely upstaged him. That Ma lacks key political skills is common knowledge. Recent events have further demonstrated that he also lacks leadership ability, and his claims that he is a tough party leader are beginning to ring hollow. Ma did not wish to launch a presidential recall bid at first due to his fears that Soong would use the bid to hoard pan-blue voters.
To counterbalance Soong, Ma had little choice but to seek to topple the Cabinet. Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
The stakes are especially high in light of the fact that PFP and KMT legislators alike are unwilling to risk their jobs by forcing the Cabinet to resign en masse -- and the issue is dividing the KMT. If Ma wields his power to push for a vote of no-confidence in the Cabinet, he might very well split the KMT into opposing factions, a move that would seriously diminish his authority.
Soong accurately assessed that KMT legislators did not support Ma's call for a no-confidence vote but rather wanted to support the recall campaign. He took advantage of those KMT legislators opposing the no-confidence vote by saying that if the recall motion failed, the next step would be to topple the Cabinet. He thus turned a situation disadvantageous to the PFP away from the PFP and toward the KMT, making Ma support the recall motion over toppling the Cabinet. This placed responsibility for opposing a no-confidence vote on Ma and took the pressure off Soong himself.
The recall motion against Chen illustrates how a political has-been like Soong can manipulate a highly popular figure like Ma. What's more, Soong has effectively marginalized KMT Taipei mayoral candidate Hau Lung-bin (
Soong has abandoned any scruples that he may have had left and bet the house to win the Taipei mayoral race. The recall motion was a dud, but it made enough of a bang to throw Ma and Hau off balance. Soong's real reason for the recall charade, however, is to put on a good warm-up act before for the real show: the year-end mayoral race.
Chin Heng-wei is the editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
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