Following the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) loss in the presidential election, a strong voice has emerged attributing the loss to the “deep green” faction hijacking the DPP and urging the party to take the “middle road.”
What is this middle road? The political reality is the “pan-blue camp” represents China, whereas the “pan-green camp” represents Taiwan. In choosing between these two definitions of national identity, asking the DPP to take the middle road is tantamount to asking it to rally around the Chinese nationalism represented by the pan-blue camp.
This suggestion not only betrays the founding principles and ideals of the DPP, but it has also proven to be unsuccessful in practice. During the party primary and presidential election, DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) adopted an attitude of compromise and willingness to take the middle road — including emphasizing reconciliation and mutual survival and even defending a “constitutional one China.” The result was that the party lost by 2 million votes. Losing is not frightening in itself. What is frightening is when the loser does not even understand how the defeat came about.
Proponents of the middle road say that the relationship between Taiwan and China — and the DPP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — cannot be interpreted as antagonistic. But the fact is China has 1,400 missiles aimed at Taiwan. China has shown its determination to subsume Taiwan through its “Anti-Secession” Law and constantly seeks to diplomatically isolate Taiwan. If this is not the behavior of an enemy, how many more missiles and how much more oppression does Taiwan need to deal with?
The KMT is undeniably an enemy party of the DPP. Moreover, it is not a truly democratic party. If the KMT believes in democracy, it must return the public property it embezzled during the party-state era. Its continued possession of state property is the greatest testament to corruption in Taiwan. Furthermore, the party should actively remove the remnants of dictator Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) rule and deal with the family’s history of authoritarian rule to realize transitional justice. In addition, it must truly recognize Taiwan and remove the character “Chinese” from its title (中國國民黨) to become the Taiwanese Nationalist Party.
However, not only has the KMT refused to comply with these criteria, president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) even visited the Chiangs’ grave to pay his respects. Vice president-elect Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) and former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) have also visited China to scratch the back of Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). In doing so, the KMT has sold out Taiwan’s dignity and interests, while introducing the “one China” ideology into Taiwan.
The KMT also publicly considers the DPP its “main opponent” and intends to unite with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to curb Taiwanese independence. This has not only prevented Taiwan from achieving normal statehood, but also positions the DPP as a more antagonistic opponent than the CCP.
To those wishful thinkers within the DPP who advocate compromise and taking the middle road, not only has the KMT never reciprocated this interest, elections have also proven time and again that this route is not viable.
Any democratic party lacking in core values will eventually be eliminated by voters. If the DPP does not elect a non-factional leader who can uphold the party’s ideals, the party’s future will be bleak. As former secretary-general of the Presidential Office Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟) recently said: If the DPP were to emphasize the middle road at this point, then one should consider abandoning the DPP.
Cao Changqing is a Chinese writer based in the US.
Translated by Angela Hong
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