With the government under acute pressure over a series of gaffes and ill-judged or poorly promoted policies, the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been given an excellent opportunity to bounce back from its routing in the presidential and legislative elections.
The question that must be asked, then, is why the DPP has been conspicuous for its restraint if not silence over the last weeks as the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) embarks on an epic struggle between party headquarters and its presidential, executive and legislative wings.
DPP Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has a scholastic and dedicated air, but as party leader she will need to develop a more hard-hitting presence if she is to combine party reform with oversight of the government and the KMT in the eyes of voters.
Even if the DPP cannot aim too high so soon in this presidential term, at the least it must seek to influence public discourse and make hay from the regular disruptions in relations between the KMT’s power bases.
Unlike the US, British, Canadian and Australian systems, for example, in which opposition parties have clear-cut leaders in various chambers, Taiwan’s political system allows the opposition party to have many voices but none that is definitive.
With caucus whips acting as party spokespeople but without the authority or mandate of the party chairperson, it can be difficult to get the message across consistently.
For this reason, and despite having pressing responsibilities of party reform, Tsai will need to play a more substantial role in criticizing specific legislation and legislative practices even though she is not a legislator.
The less-than-stellar DPP presence in the legislature makes this even more important.
Legislators Chai Trong-rong (蔡同榮), Ko Chien-ming (柯建銘) and Tsai Huang-liang (蔡煌瑯) may be among the more authoritative opposition members, and they do make an effort to feed the media’s appetite for sound bites, but none has the charisma or general level of public support to act as a clear-cut legislative leader.
The KMT is doing the DPP some real favors, even though the latter is not capitalizing on this. A diffusion of political power across various official and party centers means that individual voices have become less representative and still less authoritative.
The president is an exception; he and the vice president are the only officials directly elected by the nation as a whole. But former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰), current Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) are party to a reconfiguring of power in the KMT and the government. Each of these men is ambitious and highly active, but none is serving in a position that has a national mandate — though Wang may argue differently, having been elected by a majority of legislators to run the lawmaking body. One way or another, their various interests are weakening the party’s ability — or at least the public perception of its ability — to function as a team in the service of the country.
A strong opposition voice is a necessary presence in a healthy democracy. The DPP would do well to consider the ramifications of letting the governing party take the lead on criticism of the government’s performance and hog the limelight with its intrigues.
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