The results of the mayoral elections in Taipei and Kaohsiung last weekend have great implications for the future development of Taiwanese politics, the dynamics of party competition and the presidential election in 2008.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) dodged the political bullets of a series of alleged scandals surrounding President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the first family as well as some party members in the run-up to the mayoral elections.
The fact is that the DPP consolidated its hold on the mayoral seat in Kaohsiung, sustained its voter base in Taipei and suppressed an emerging split and power struggle within the party.
The so-called "four big shots" -- potential competitors for the next presidential nomination -- are now on equal footing with Frank Hsieh (
DPP Chairman Yu Shyi-kun is expected to stay in power and lead the party out of its recent political whirlpool. The need for the party to engage in introspection also constitutes Yu's greatest challenge.
Premier Su Tseng-chang's (
It is imperative for the DPP leadership to utilize the national yearning for reconciliation, rational political competition, rejuvenation of the economy and improvement in government efficiency in the remainder of Chen's term to convince voters that it can reinforce institutional reforms and forge clean politics.
In this regard, the bid for presidential nomination -- which is expected to start next spring -- should be driven by internal unity and national development, not by individual or factional interests.
While the public has placed greater emphasis on politicians' ethics more than their performance, the DPP still has the chance to reinvent its image and regain the public's confidence.
The opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), under Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
But instead, the polls cast a political shadow on Ma's overrated popularity and fragile leadership.
The so-called "Ma phenomenon" or "Ma miracle" was sidelined by his failure to forge internal reforms in the KMT and to push forward a healthy competitive relationship with the DPP government.
The KMT's failure to win back the Kaohsiung mayorship was a timely reminder to supporters of how looking to Ma to win back power in 2008 was in large measure wishful thinking. It also exposed its Achilles' heel -- a lack of leadership and agenda distinguishing itself from the DPP.
Given the Taiwan Solidarity Union and the People First Party are all facing possible implosion after the mayoral elections -- as witnessed by the latter's Chairman James Soong's (宋楚瑜) announcement that he would retire from politics, and the decreasing influence of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) -- and that a new electoral system will be introduced in the next legislative election, a two-party dynamic will further consolidate. The room for an independent "third alliance" is small.
Therefore, the DPP and KMT are now free from the limits of their alliances and can engage in more rational and institutionally supportive competition. Both parties should recognize the fact that voters are tired of political gridlock and finger-pointing.
Whoever can react positively to this will win in 2008.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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