If the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is elected Taiwan’s next president on Jan. 14, the nation would be politically zigzagging rather than choosing to continue the stable and peaceful development achieved under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). At least that is the argument doing the rounds in the international community, and it displays a worrying lack of historical memory of even recent events in Taiwan.
A reality check reveals that the zigzagging started with Ma’s election victory in 2008 and his failure to live up to the expectations of Taiwanese.
Over the past almost four years, Ma has been a handy tool for China and the international community to keep the unification dream alive. Observers have been able to argue that Ma’s big election win in 2008 is evidence that Taiwanese support his China-leaning policies. By extension, Taiwanese must therefore support the “one China” policy of Europe and the US, which is part of the inevitable trend toward the unification of Taiwan and China. Nothing could be more wrong.
When set against growing awareness of a common Taiwanese identity originating from a variety of factors, such as the nation’s distinctive history and unique society, Ma’s policies are not part of an inevitable trend, but rather an obvious political outlier.
Ma considers Taiwan to be a region of China and himself president of Taiwan and China. If this view and his domestic policies represented a significant and robust political consensus in Taiwan, the most recent polls would not have him trailing Tsai in what has been an otherwise tight race.
The real historical trend has a far longer provenance. Former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) supported and encouraged, in their own fashions, the pursuit of a common and unique Taiwanese identity, independence and democratic development. This trend is substantiated by a wide range of opinion polls.
Over the past 16 years, the number of Taiwanese who identify themselves as Taiwanese has increased significantly — from 17.3 percent in 1992 to 54.2 percent in June. At the same time, identification with China has correspondingly dropped from 26.2 percent in 1992 to 4.1 percent in June. This is a trend that has continued since Ma became president. A recent survey showed that 74 percent of Taiwanese would prefer independence if given a free choice and that more than 81.7 percent reject China’s proposal of “one country, two systems.”
Ma is the one who represents a break with history. His policies have hurt Taiwan’s hard-won international status and thus constitute a serious setback for the nation.
One always has to be careful to not overestimate statistical outliers. Such outcomes are often created during unusual circumstances, such as the 2008 election. However, when such results do not herald a new trend, they are more often than not a blip on the radar that quickly disappears.
A DPP win next month would put Taiwan firmly back on a healthy and sustainable path both domestically and in terms of its relationship with China and the international community.
Michael Danielsen is the chairman of Taiwan Corner.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS