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
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