Since naming former premier Vincent Siew (
Ma has stated that he wants to make the economy the main issue of the presidential election -- the obvious rationale for choosing technocrat Siew -- and has declared the independence versus unification debate that has dominated Taiwanese politics over the last few years a "fake" issue.
So far, so good. Ma has pulled out all the stops to ensure the spotlight remains firmly on economic affairs, with his campaign activities frequently releasing plans for Taiwan's economy combined with speeches at various economic bodies and forums.
Ma is making an early effort to frame the debate and take the lead in deciding which issues will be discussed in the build-up to next March's election.
By doing so, he is also trying to divert attention from his biggest weakness -- his stance on Taiwan's status -- because Ma is fully aware that his view that Taiwan is part of China, in his case the Republic of China, is a potential election-losing issue.
Ma knows that his and the KMT's stated preference for eventual unification puts them at odds with a growing number of Taiwanese who do not identify with China and the majority who prefer to maintain the "status quo."
But while the vast number of Taiwanese are content with this -- for now -- practical way of dealing with the cross-strait conundrum, it is quite obvious that China is not at all content.
Beijing would not be continuing its relentless acquisition of advanced weaponry, quite clearly aimed at one day forcing Taiwan to acquiesce to its demands, if it was happy with waiting another few decades as Ma has suggested doing.
In fact one could argue that the independence-unification issue is the only thing on China's mind. It holds the importance of the "return of Taiwan" above all else.
The threat two years ago by a Chinese major general to strike US cities with nuclear weapons in the event of any US intervention in a cross-strait conflict and the 1,000 missiles Beijing has pointing at Taiwan shows how seriously many in China take this issue.
Therefore, it is going to be extremely difficult for Ma to avoid talking about it at some point.
The independence-unification issue is, unfortunately for Ma, not something that can be swept under the carpet so easily and he is being naive if he thinks he can keep the focus off it during the nine-month campaign.
Because like it or not, China is the biggest threat to Taiwan's future, and whether the subject is health, education, agriculture, tourism, diplomacy, participation in the international community, defense or the economy, the shadow of China and the difficulties of cross-strait policy connected to these issues looms menacingly in the background.
None of these subjects can be properly discussed without considering Taiwan's relations with China and therefore the sovereignty issue is bound to crop up sooner or later. This is the major flaw in Ma's strategy.
It will take an intense effort on behalf of the Ma camp and no small amount of political skill for him to avoid the sovereignty issue.
But then he has shown in the past how, if given the chance, he can manipulate the media to keep the focus off awkward situations and embarrassing problems.
He enjoyed reasonable success in this regard on the day he was indicted by simultaneously announcing his presidential bid.
But whatever transpires during the election build-up, Ma still has a very good chance of winning next year, partly because of his personal popularity and partly because of the changeovers that periodically occur in every two-party democracy.
But in order to stay the course and not jeopardize his victory chances, Ma must avoid getting cornered on the independence-unification issue, keeping his personal belief and that of his party locked far away from public scrutiny.
This will be a big ask, but he has given himself a head start by beginning the race early and on his own terms. Democratic Progressive Party candidate Frank Hsieh (
But in his haste to take the initiative Ma must be careful not to reveal too much of his hand too early, as doing so will provide a wily campaigner like Hsieh with the ammunition to fully expose any shortcomings in Ma's agenda and shoot down his presidential dream.
Richard Hazeldine is a writer based in Taipei.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS