It is never easy to govern. An election campaign is about black and white, but governing is more about gray. In a true democracy, it is often a tough job for a popularly elected leader to strike a balance between motivating supporters and dictating policy.
Good leadership is more about the power to persuade and bargain than the power to dictate and manipulate. Unfortunately, this is exactly the problem facing Taiwan’s government today.
Recent controversy over whether President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) should singlehandedly negotiate and sign a comprehensive economic and cooperation agreement (CECA) with his Chinese counterpart was another manifestation of how Ma disregards public concerns and legislative oversight.
Under tremendous domestic pressure, Ma was forced to use the less concrete term “economic cooperation framework agreement” (ECFA). Nevertheless, Ma continues to insist that his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government should strike a deal with China without the legislature first needing to give the agreement a green light.
Why is this? The legislature is controlled by the KMT, which enjoys an absolute majority. It is hard to see how a KMT-dominated legislature would override Ma’s hoped-for agreement with Beijing.
In addition to opposition from the Democratic Progressive Party and some civic associations, most people have no idea what a CECA or an ECFA means, nor do they know what benefits that the latter would bring to an economy in decline. This constitutes Ma’s biggest leadership challenge.
Ma and the KMT have attributed the recession to the global financial crisis. But if Ma had not raised expectations during his election campaign that he would achieve a growth rate of 6 percent, increase per capita income to US$30,000 and lower the unemployment rate to 3 percent, then people would not have been so frustrated and regretful over voting an incapable man into office.
Ma must stop basking in the 58 percent support he garnered in the presidential election and recognize the rapid erosion of his popularity. Most importantly, he needs to adopt a more humble and more convincing strategy to rebuild public trust. In doing this, the power to negotiate with the opposition and communicate with the public is key.
Even with the KMT controlling the executive and the legislature by a wide margin, Ma must make a greater effort at reconciliation to bridge social divisions and establish a domestic consensus on this controversial policy.
Space for negotiation determines whether Ma should be aggressive or conciliatory in promoting policy. Should he lash out boldly with a new approach and a new stance, or focus instead on incremental change? Is it time to run up the flag and charge, or to mediate differences and seek to move toward a consensus by stages?
In this case, Ma has fast-tracked his cross-strait policy since taking office, showing nothing but arrogance and disrespect for the opposition and the public.
The four agreements on cross-strait opening reached by the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party last December were never debated in the legislature — before or since.
Ma’s choice of media interviews to elaborate on his ideas was also misplaced. These interviews and reports, especially in Taiwan, were too often elitist and one-sided.
Fundamentally, what Ma needs to do is explain the reasons behind these bold initiatives to the rank and file — face to face. But because he has had difficulty elaborating on his policy in the Hoklo language (commonly known as Taiwanese), Ma has probably decided to bypass public discussion — in contrast to his Hoklo-speaking performances during his election campaign.
Given that the economy won’t be back on track for at least two years, Ma needs to come up with immediate results with his cross-strait policy to bolster his re-election bid.
The paradox is that cross-strait relations cannot be conducted in such a rushed and unresponsive manner.
Ma should at least look to US President Barack Obama. Since taking office, Obama has made use of a national craving for reconciliation between political parties and for economic rejuvenation by launching a series of reform initiatives.
Unlike Ma, Obama is selling his agenda through a combination of persuasion and bargaining.
Obama has not only displayed analytical skills in identifying a solution to the US’ problems, but has also applied effective managerial leadership to narrow down competing views on his bold initiatives. Thus far, no “rookie president” syndrome has emerged to damage his high approval rating.
Ma should rely on motivational rather than dictatorial behavior as he attempts to build domestic support. When it comes to bold initiatives, leaving voters behind is not an act of leadership, but of arrogance.
Liu Shih-chung is a visiting fellow in the Center for Northeast Asian Policy Studies at the Brookings Institution in Washington.
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
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
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
RSS