THANKS TO THE adoption of a new electoral system -- the single-member district, two-vote system -- the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won nearly three-fourths of the legislative seats in the Jan. 12 elections, giving the party the ability to control the legislative agenda. This will have a far reaching impact on the legislative climate.
First, the halving of the number of legislative seats from 225 to 113 that comes into effect when the new legislature convenes on Feb. 25 will further expand legislative power.
The KMT will undoubtedly be resistant to changing any rules that benefit the party. If KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) were to win in the March 22 election, the fact that the KMT holds more or less the same majority in the legislature that it had during the presidency of Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) would mean that the president would have almost unlimited power, stripping the country of the balance of power that should exist in a democracy and making it wholly dependent on the KMT to voluntarily exercise caution.
Second, the fact that voters were unwilling to split their two votes between parties has resulted in a further "localization" of legislators.
In the larger districts under the old system, a diverse multitude of legislators were elected, while the single-member district system has created a stronger connection between legislators and local districts. This and the reduction of legislative seats means that legislators will likely focus more on grassroots issues. However, there is cause for concern over legislative quality and the compromises and conflicts of interest that stronger local ties could lead to.
Third, the KMT's large legislative majority does not imply that conflict between the two camps will be reduced.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), with its 27 seats, can still paralyze the legislature. Issues such as the opening of the three direct links and signing a peace and coexistence pact with China may heighten conflict in the legislature. Unless the DPP can persuade deep-green legislators to back off, such issues could easily result in a stand-off. And the KMT, with its large majority, could easily launch larger and stronger counterattacks than it had in the past.
If the KMT gets control of both the Cabinet and the legislature, the legislature could become a KMT rubber stamp. Since the party tends to be more conservative when it comes to social welfare and tax reform issues and given its solid ties to business, it is difficult for more idealistic politicians to find acceptance in the party. Neither is the party known for working closely with environmental, women's rights and nongovernmental organizations. This could mean that the DPP may have to once again work together with these social organizations to monitor the KMT by building public pressure.
What could be done to deal with the legislative chaos that could result from the KMT's large majority?
First, the DPP should be active in proposing legislation to reform the legislature and amend the shortcomings resulting from one party holding a huge majority. These include the Lobby Act (
And second, more efforts should be directed at pursuing constitutional amendments to change unreasonable components of the electoral system. The only chance for legislative reform is for the DPP to become a catalyst for constitutional amendment.
Li Ming-juinn is the deputy secretary-general of Taiwan Society.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
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