To alleviate concern that the legislative majority held by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) indicates a step backward for Taiwan's democracy, KMT vice presidential candidate Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) has cited Singapore, ruled by a party with an absolute majority.
Siew said Singapore is a worthwhile model. KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Singapore is not a democracy. The People's Action Party (PAP) has been the ruling party since 1957, before Singapore became independent. The PAP holds 91 of 94 seats in the Singaporean parliament, despite winning only 66.6 percent of the vote.
The government controls public discourse, partly through two major media groups, while the Internal Security Department can detain dissidents indefinitely.
The day after elections in 2006, for example, people who opposed the PAP were arrested.
The situation is much like that in Taiwan during the Martial Law era, when the government relied on emergency measures to stifle all forms of dissent.
The unity of party and state in Singapore is reflected in the business world. The PAP, through Temasek Holdings, which did not publish financial statements until 2004, controls key sectors: phone company SingTel, Singapore Airlines, the mass rapid transit system, the port, global shipping company Neptune Orient Lines, Singapore Power, the Keppel Group and Raffles Hotel.
Temasek Holdings owns nearly half the market's value on the Singapore stock exchange.
The Singaporean government also invests in foreign firms through the mysterious Government of Singapore Investment Corp, which never publishes financial statements and manages property worth more than US$100 billion.
The enormous benefits are exclusively for those at the top of the party and government tree.
It is also because of this unfair system that Singapore has the largest gap between rich and poor among developed nations.
The income ratio between the highest and lowest one-fifth of the population is 31.9, with a Gini coefficient of 0.522 in 2005, compared with Taiwan's ratio of about 6 with a Gini coefficient of 0.339 in 2006. The gap is therefore much larger in Singapore.
Human rights, freedom, democracy and equality are basic, universal human values -- yet these values are being suppressed in Singapore. Do Taiwanese need to make such a sacrifice?
The authoritarian regimes of former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew (李光耀) and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (李顯龍) share too many features with those of dictators Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) for Singapore to be worthy of such uncritical praise.
Tseng Wei-chen is a researcher in the Department of History at National Taiwan Normal University. Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS