Last week, Democratic Progres-sive Party (DPP) Chairman Yu Shyi-kun abruptly announced that his party should form a "Green Justice Alliance" with the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU), and even advocated a merger with the TSU. However, the TSU has mixed feelings about Yu's proposition. Judging from the party's past cooperation with the DPP, I cannot help but think that this is a calculated attempt to shift the focus away from the DPP's problems.
When the DPP is faring well, it rarely pays any attention to the TSU. In times of crisis, however, it suddenly remembers us. This month marks the fifth anniversary of the TSU's founding. Before the meeting between President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) in February last year, the TSU threw its weight behind the DPP on grounds of safeguarding Taiwan's first localized regime. We also went all-out to help Chen win re-election in 2004.
Unfortunately, the DPP turns selfish whenever an election is around the corner, taking advantage of the TSU's localization stance while unilaterally tearing up cooperation agreements with the TSU and even stealing the support base we have worked so hard to build up.
The TSU learned its lesson in the 2004 legislative elections. The DPP has never treated the TSU with genuine respect, regarding it only as a pawn to be manipulated. Now, with a record of poor government and having become entangled in corruption scandals, it has the gall to ask the TSU to sacrifice itself and join the DPP.
Since the allegations surrounding Chen's son-in-law Chao Chien-ming (趙建銘) were brought to light, both Chen's and the DPP's approval ratings have plunged to unprecedented lows. Although Chen escaped the presidential recall campaign unscathed, a series of corruption scandals are still under investigation and the evidence collected has placed the first family in a very unfavorable position.
Meanwhile, the government's policy implementation has not improved, the economy remains in a slump and the gap between rich and poor is widening. Some of the DPP's members are also involved in corruption scandals, infighting continues and the issue of nominal party members remains unresolved. With the party unable to put its own house in order, how can it possibly talk about merging with the TSU?
How can the TSU, a strong proponent of clean governance, merge with the corrupt DPP at this juncture? If it did, it would only show the same contempt for justice and the localization cause.
The TSU is an independent party upholding the cause of localization, clean governance, and people's welfare and livelihoods. The party does not rule out collaborating with any political party as long as the cause benefits the general public. However, whether the TSU enters into such cooperation will depend on the will of the Taiwanese and if the party in question is clean.
The DPP's call for a coalition or merger with the TSU may have been aimed at striking a chord in softhearted pan-green supporters who cannot bear to see a divided green camp and who will expect the TSU to obediently do as it is told. But at a deeper level, if the DPP fails to overhaul itself and instead only plans to devour the TSU, it will only bring about the disintegration of the localized government. I wonder if this is what pan-green supporters want to see.
The TSU is a friend who gives forthright admonitions, and we will not blindly follow the DPP. Based on the independent nature of political parties and their responsibilities to the people, any party can outline policy proposals on which it wants to collaborate with the TSU, such as the national economic revival program, the probe into the KMT's ill-gotten assets, the national flood-control project and anything else that can improve people's livelihoods.
The TSU will definitely welcome with open arms any proposal beneficial to the nation's development. But if the DPP is only trying to shift the focus away from its problems, Yu could have saved his breath. The TSU is not a pawn at the DPP's command, and the DPP would do better to mind its factional issues and corruption problems.
David Kuo is the director of the TSU Policy Center.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS