In state elections in the US on Nov. 3, the Democratic Party lost out. These were the first elections since US President Barack Obama took office, but many saw them as a local affair, not as a mid-term test for Obama. Rather than blaming Obama, the Democratic Party swallowed the bitter pill. On Saturday it was Taiwan’s turn to hold local elections. Although the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won the top posts in 12 out of 17 cities and counties, losing only Yilan and Hualien counties among those seats it had held, public opinion sees the results as a defeat for the KMT and blames President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the KMT chairman, for the losses.
Why such a difference between the US and Taiwan? Obama was not responsible for campaigning for local candidates. Ma, on the other hand, made every effort to do so, rushing about the country. He campaigned 11 times in Yilan County alone, where he stood on the stage with the KMT candidate in two different places on the eve of the vote. For all his efforts, however, the KMT still lost Yilan. It is no surprise, therefore, that people should hold Ma responsible for the loss.
The KMT lost control of two counties, but only one went to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). More significantly, the KMT’s share of the vote fell steeply, from about 60 percent in last year’s presidential election to 47.88 percent, while the DPP’s share grew from 41.55 percent to 45.32. While Ma’s aura is fading, the DPP is beginning to recover from the corruption charges against former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁).
Ma told reporters he thought it was the “general environment” that resulted in a lower-than-expected voter turnout and seats won for the KMT. He did not shoulder any of the responsibility for the results. Nor did he promise a reshuffle in the party, saying only that “everything” would be discussed in the post-election analysis. While Ma apparently feels he can’t be blamed because the party’s candidates were finalized by his predecessor as party chairman, Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄), in practice Ma has been in charge of all party affairs since July. It should be difficult for him to dodge responsibility in connection to both the nominations and campaigning.
In addition, the government’s ineptitude can hardly be blamed on Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義), who has been in office for just over two months. In particular, given the popularity of Ma’s 6-3-3 campaign promise last year and the stark contrast between it and the current situation, voters did not care that Saturday’s polls were not a presidential election — they used the chance to show their dissatisfaction.
Ma was perfectly right in saying voters had been magnanimous — how else could one explain their rewarding government inability and dictatorial policymaking by handing the KMT 12 county commissioner and mayoral seats? Yet Saturday’s results were a warning.
If the government doesn’t pay heed to the public’s concerns about US beef, the economic cooperation and framework agreement with China, recognition of Chinese academic credentials, poor government performance and anger over vote-buying, then Ma and the KMT will pay a heavy price in next year’s special municipality and legislative elections.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS