In politics, what can make a politician fall from heaven to hell in just a second? Over-reliance on his new mandate, failing to read the public mood and a huge lack of governmental coordination and internal discipline constitute the most common errors that new presidents make in the beginning of their first terms.
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, who took office in February, has faced growing protests over his government’s agreement in April to resume beef imports from the US to clear the way for approval of a wider free-trade deal. Lee was also forced to announce a partial Cabinet reshuffle because of some scandals related to his officials.
Lee’s campaign checks of “747” — making the country the seventh largest economy in the world, decreasing the unemployment rate to 4 percent and realizing economic growth rate of 7 percent — have all bounced already. The result has been a sharp drop in his approval rating from nearly 70 percent to less than 20 percent.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is walking the same path as his South Korean counterpart. Various public polls show that Ma’s popularity has steadily declined from the 58 percent of popular votes he received in the presidential election to less than 50 percent. Dissatisfaction has weighed on Ma’s approval rating.
Ma’s initial reaction to the drop in his popularity was to continue his strategy of letting the Cabinet take the fall. Ma took advantage of Taiwan’s unique constitutional system of “dual executives” and argued that the premier is the administrative chief with the highest authority over most domestic matters, while the president’s responsibilities chiefly lie in diplomacy, national defense and cross-strait relations.
Amid public furor over rising fuel and commodity prices and farmers’ calls for help following flooding in the south, Ma was strangely silent. Questioned by the media on his silence — despite his Cabinet members being busy with crisis management — Ma cited the Constitution.
Ma did not express his concerns over the Cabinet’s performance until Taiwan’s stock market slumped recently. As of this week, the TAIEX had dropped more than 1,800 points — or more than 20 percent — since the new government took office on May 20. This stands in sharp contrast to Ma’s campaign promise that after he won the election, the stock market would reach 20,000 points.
Not to mention Ma’s other electoral pledges, the “633” slogan in particular — economic growth of 6 percent, a decreased unemployment rate of 3 percent and an increased GDP of US$30,000 — seem unlikely to be achieved any time soon.
It is ironic to see that the new government, with its absolute majority in the legislature, was not able to enjoy a “honeymoon” period after taking office.
What exactly has gone wrong with the Ma administration?
First, Ma made a terrible mistake by restraining his new mandate and performing in only a “symbolic” role over the first month and a half.
Although Taiwan’s Constitution delegates the highest executive power to the premier, the president is popularly elected and retains a greater democratic mandate. The president has absolute power to appoint the premier regardless of legislative consent.
Just because Ma appears to intend to have Premier Liu Chao-hsuan (劉兆玄) and his Cabinet do most of the work does not necessarily mean the president himself can always hide behind the political scenes.
Ma’s strategy seems to be avoiding the frontline where he risks becoming the main target of the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). However, this will backfire and the fallout from public dissatisfaction will strike only the president himself.
A politician needs a permanent campaign to keep a permanent majority. Keeping a majority does not mean abandoning principles. It means caring enough about how you explain yourself to get the nation behind you. But when political leaders take bold steps and don’t explain them properly or present fancy electoral pledges and fail to implement them, the public will automatically blame everything on them.
Using the premier and the Cabinet as a “political firewall” for self-protection does no good for Ma. Changing the premier or reshuffling the Cabinet will further damage Ma’s popularity. Sooner or later Ma will have to face the nation and shoulder responsibility.
If Lee is too stubborn to accept public anger against his leadership, Ma is too conservative to live up to the public’s expectations.
Ma’s second mistake is to use the opening of cross-strait direct links as the only antidote to Taiwan’s sluggish economy. Ma expressed clearly that improved cross-strait relations and greater government investment in the domestic market would help his administration cope with the adverse impact of growing inflation and a local bourse that continues a downward trend.
Regardless of national security issues, the opening of direct weekend charter flights between Taiwan and China to Chinese tourists will only benefit certain social sectors such as the tourist industries. Placing all his economic eggs in one basket runs the risk of ignoring other international factors.
Ma should understand that the key element for his victory in the presidential election came from the scandal-ridden image of the DPP government. During his tenure, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) still successfully portrayed the image of being a caring, hardworking leader who showed great courage in his outspoken positions.
With the new mandate on him, Ma remains popular — perhaps the most popular and most powerful political figure in Taiwan. Instead of hiding behind a political stage or simply focusing on the image-building of the “long stay,” Ma should incorporate the perception of strength in addressing Taiwan’s domestic problems to prevail in the post-election political landscape.
By taking the theme of strength and applying it to anti-corruption, economic rejuvenation, combating crime and uplifting social welfare, Ma can win more support from the rank and file.
Liu Shih-chung is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS