President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has been in power for more than a month. During this period, three salient topics have called for analysis.
First is the oil price hike. The government defines this problem as a result of “global inflation pressures.” Although this is true, Ma barely touched on this topic during the election campaign and has yet to tell the public how to deal with the pressure.
Ma has only pledged to conserve energy and reduce carbon emissions, while ascertaining whether key officials at the Presidential Office carry a handkerchief or use reusable utensils. What a painful disappointment this must be for the more than 7 million voters who cast their ballot for him.
Ma should propose more concrete plans to ease the pain caused by inflation. Some simple but straightforward measures are in order. For example, a large number of people would benefit if the government were to halve national highway tolls.
Second is the government’s plan to expand domestic demand. The point is not whether this is a post-election “thank you” to local governments, as the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) claims. Rather, this plan should be viewed as part of the ruling Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) economic policy.
To the KMT, the rationale behind this plan is simple: The public will not suffer if economic growth outpaces price increases. However, the average blue or white-collar worker will not see immediate pay increases even if the economic growth rate increased.
Worst, economic policies like demand expansion could initiate an endless series of expansion processes as incomes are forced higher to keep up with the price hikes. This pursuit is destined to fail.
Third is cross-strait relations. This issue is the main focus of Ma’s administration and has garnered the highest approval. It is unlikely that the DPP would score any points for its recent attacks on the cross-strait issue, as the crux of the matter is not whether direct cargo flights would also be implemented or whether Taiwan has denigrated itself. The focus should be the significant changes that would take place once direct flights commence and Chinese tourists arrive in Taiwan.
The government has yet to tell the public how it intends to handle these challenges. What is clear is that the KMT has a fixed track in mind for cross-strait relations. Following this, Taiwan and China would inevitably get closer. This is not a big problem; the problem is what will happen once this has happened. Putting aside contentious issues such as whether Ma should be addressed as “President Ma” or “Mr Ma,” the question remains: Where will this track lead us?
If what Ma really wants is unification with China, the KMT’s plan should remain unchanged. However, if Ma intends to keep the promises he made in his inaugural speech and work to safeguard the dignity and sovereignty of Taiwan, or the Republic of China, he should propose a concrete plan to consolidate public consensus on Taiwan’s independence and sovereignty while pushing it toward China. Over the past month, we have seen the latter, but not the former.
Ma has said that he has kept the memory of the Tiananmen Square Massacre in mind since that fateful event 19 years ago. Now that Chinese tourists are coming to Taiwan, he can do a lot of things to let them understand the true nature of the Beijing regime and thus open up another track for cross-strait relations.
For example, he could distribute free DVDs highlighting the truth about the massacre. He could also use this opportunity to promote Taiwanese democracy so they can see Beijing’s real face.
In short, there are many things that Ma and his government can but have not even started to do. I believe this is a result of misdefining Taiwan’s future. It is perhaps too early for anyone — especially the DPP, which had just given up power — to grade the new government. Still, from now on, the Ma administration should take the public’s hopes for the nation’s future seriously.
Yao Jen-to is an assistant professor at National Tsing Hua University’s Graduate Institute of Sociology.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means