At key points in history, there often appear brave heros who shape the course of the age. Former president Lee Teng-hui (
As part of the world's third wave of democratization, Taiwan is the best example of transformation from a Leninist-style regime to a democratic political system. The way that Lee used his determination and knack for understanding the situation to circuitously push through reforms from within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is worthy of study by politicians and business managers alike.
Lee was to the KMT what Japanese kendo is to taichi, in that his logic and responses were completely different. The KMT old guard were completely ignorant of kendo, and were therefore defenseless against Lee. By the time they realized he had struck, the battle was already over.
Lee used popular support as his backing. He manipulated the KMT factions until he had them where he wanted them, then broke the conservative factions one by one. He carefully dismantled martial law, pushed forward a pragmatic foreign policy, established a new political identity and turned Taiwan into a country for the Taiwanese, one step at a time. In skillfully redirecting Taiwan's politics onto another track, Lee was a bit like Turkey's Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who mixed the preference for reform over revolution with lightning-quick battle tactics.
The society, politics, economics and diplomatic relations of the Lee era were completely different from the situation faced by President Chen Shui-bian (
The father of Taiwan and the son of Taiwan have faced different challenges, worked with different resources and employed different policies. Just like the ages they governed in, the good points and shortcomings of their personalities and abilities also appear in striking contrast.
Lee is a deep thinker, a man of broad knowledge and a skillful strategist. He looked at the big picture, made his plans systematically and executed them in a timely manner.
However, Chen was trained as a lawyer and treats politics as if he were handling a legal case. He doesn't have the burden of ideology, but he also lacks Lee's sense of purpose and values. His penchant for practicality goes along with his short-term thinking. He doesn't have the haughtiness of an intellectual, but he also lacks a background in humanities and history.
He is like the small business owners who travel the world with a box of goods in search of buyers, who toil long hours and are resolute in the face of hardship, but who lack the ability to plan for the long term and don't have any experience working as part of a group.
Chen's political record has been disastrous, but the merits and flaws of his personality are the same as those of Taiwanese society. "The son of Taiwan" is an apt title.
Power is a fluid and mysterious thing, a combination of trust, respect and authority. But how one uses power is a more complex issue. Power, not matter how great, is useless to a person who lacks leadership skills.
Someone like Lee, who understands not only how to take power but also how to wield it, is truly worthy of being called the foremost person in Taiwanese history.
Antonio Chiang is a former deputy secretary general of the National Security Council.
Translated by Marc Langer
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means