After four long years of angst and of hope that things might change, numerous Taiwanese are now having to live with the bitter taste of defeat. Deep down, some people feel a sense of trepidation for what the future holds, and are in need of emotional support.
Faced with her failed presidential bid, the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) announced that she would take responsibility for the outcome, saying it was time for her to stand down as party chairperson. We commend her courage in accepting responsibility, but we would ask her to reconsider the decision.
We offer the following reasons.
First, the odds of winning the election were always heavily stacked against Tsai and the DPP. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has access to prodigious amounts of party resources. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) also had the advantage of access to government resources as the incumbent, as well as the backing of Beijing, which attempted to influence the vote through economic intimidation. All of this conspired against Tsai, making her task all the more difficult.
Second, many examples of corruption were observed during the election. Twelve borough chiefs were accused of vote buying in Greater Kaohsiung’s Fongshan District (鳳山) alone, and another 12 community chiefs were suspected of doing the same in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Sanchong District (三重).
Third, the incumbent arranged it so that the elections happened to fall during the period when schools were holding their end-of-semester examinations and a week before the beginning of the Lunar New Year holiday. This decision affected first time voters and itinerant workers who would have needed to return home to vote.
Fourth, in the 2008 election, Ma and Vice President Vincent Siew (蕭萬長), received more than 7,658,000 votes, beating the DPP by more than 2,210,00 votes. However, under Tsai’s stewardship the DPP was able to close that gap by a considerable degree, receiving about 798,000 fewer votes than Ma. There were also gains in the number of legislative seats and the number of party votes received. So, there is some glory to be had, even in defeat.
Finally, the party’s chair is due to change hands mid-year, so it is even less desirable for Tsai to go before the pre-arranged handover.
It is widely acknowledged that Tsai has guided the party through some very precarious territory during the past four years. The DPP was truly fortunate to have had her at the helm. She has shown outstanding leadership qualities, being astute and wise, as well as demonstrating a natural amiability and warmth in combination with a willingness to accommodate all sides of an argument. The defeat is not only her loss, it is also Taiwan’s loss.
There remains so much to do in the wake of the election and the nation faces so many challenges. We implore Tsai to rethink her position to stand down.
[Editor’s note: Tsai Ing-wen tendered her resignation as DPP chairperson yesterday, which takes effect March 1.]
Reverend Kao Chun-ming (高俊明) is a Presbyterian pastor; Hwang Kun-hu (黃崑虎) is president of the Taiwan Friends Association; Cheng Cheng-yu (鄭正煜) is a former chairman of the Southern Taiwan Society; Wu Ting-ho (吳庭和) is a former director of the Taiwan Association of America; Cho Chun-ying (卓春英) is an associate professor at Chang Jung Christian University; Chien Chiao-tung (簡交通) is director of the Southern Taiwan Society; Chang Yeh-sen (張葉森) is chairman of the Taiwan Hakka Society.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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