President Chen Shui-bian (
This is arguably the case. Over the years Chen has proven indefatigable on the hustings and a formidable opponent for those without his energy. The 2004 presidential election showed that Chen could appeal to millions of voters who had voted against the DPP in local elections.
One problem with Chen -- and it has been this way from the first days of his presidency -- is his faltering sense of strategy. There have been myriad examples of Chen building momentum on an issue, only to blow it all on inexplicable actions and turns of phrase that alienated allies and fortified enemies.
Today, we are beginning to see this self-destructive behavior re-emerge just in time for the legislative and presidential elections thanks to an ill-advised broadside against Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), based on the words of Ma's late father engraved on his urn allegedly supporting China's unification.
This is specious and repulsive politicking on Chen's part. Worryingly for the DPP, Chen seems unaware that attacks on politicians for the perceived sins of their parents can backfire badly.
It is bizarre that Chen would adopt a strategy based on indecent assumptions of family accountability when Ma's track record -- the things Ma has done for which he is solely responsible -- is fodder enough for political purposes.
Chen rightfully took responsibility for the single most damaging event to his government: the failure to capture the legislature in late 2004. He did so by resigning the party chairmanship -- a move that was highly appropriate considering that the loss was a strategic debacle. The DPP treated the poll like a presidential election, focusing on cross-strait sloganeering instead of local candidates and developing strategies for the then multiple-member districts.
Now Chen is chairman again, and the results so far have not been impressive. DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (
Instead of concentrating on the fate of DPP candidates, Chen is wasting his time sniping at Ma over what his father had engraved on his urn. This is even more laughable given that in the months before his death, Ma's father, Ma Ho-ling (
How the "sins of the father" can be credibly employed in this situation defies reasonable analysis.
Chen has strayed into such politicking before, never more memorably than when he exploited the misuse of Taichung Mayor Jason Hu's (
Ma Ying-jeou himself has sunk so deep into the gutter lately that sympathy for him on this matter should be tempered. But that doesn't excuse Chen.
One thing a "lame duck" president can do is exert a positive influence on the political environment by maintaining personal integrity and reminding the public of fundamental questions: What is good for a country? What contributes to a more productive political discourse? And how should Taiwanese conduct themselves for the betterment of all?
But now that Chen is adopting nonsensical and demeaning tactics to attack his foe, his chance to pave the way for a better environment has gone, and possibly with this some of the key support for the DPP that he obtained four years ago.
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