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
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS