Following an intense battle between the five candidates in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson elections, former premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) won by a landslide on Sunday with more than 50 percent of the vote. This is not the first time Su has led the DPP.
Although the DPP lost in the Jan. 14 presidential election, given its pretty strong performance and President President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) currently low popularity ratings, the party’s prospects are looking up and Su’s return to the spotlight will attract increasing attention.
Su’s political experience is second to none. He was a member of the Taiwan Provincial Assembly, a county commissioner twice, a legislator, DPP secretary-general, party chairman, secretary-general of the Presidential Office and also, of course, premier. While in those positions, Su produced results and he continues to be popular with the public. He is also politically astute and his return to the party leadership will make him even more powerful.
The joint attack on Su by the other candidates in the chairperson election was both ugly and unfair, but Su remained gracious and refused to rise to the bait. While this earned him considerable sympathy, it also means that his first task as party chair must be to unite the party internally. He must take solid steps to resolve intra-party tension to be able to lead the DPP forward.
Su is a man of integrity who is both strict and impartial and he possesses boundless energy. These are all good traits in a leader; but as party chairperson he will need to adopt a softer approach and learn how to compromise and communicate both within and outside the party. He will have to adjust his style to be able to unite the different factions and organize a team that will be able to bring the party back into government.
The most heavily criticized aspect of the chairpersonship vote was that the debates between candidates focused on personalities and the unification-independence issue. Very little time was spent discussing the policies that have been the target of so much public criticism, and this did nothing to create an image of a party that is ready to take over government.
Su will need to create a positive image for the party and have it conduct itself in a manner consistent with its status as the largest opposition party. The DPP cannot content itself with government-bashing. It has experience in government and Su has served as premier. Neither can it simply criticize the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) policies without offering viable alternatives.
Su needs to form a shadow Cabinet and to bring together academics, think tanks and senior party members who can formulate concrete social policies to compete with those of the KMT. This is how he can prepare his troops for the next election, and win the support of the public.
Former party chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) electoral defeat has caused the DPP to question whether it needs to amend its China policy. This area has been contentious ever since the party was formed and there has never really been consensus on what it should be, forcing Tsai to come up with a “Taiwan consensus” during her presidential campaign.
That campaign is now over. Su doesn’t have a lot of time to come up with a new stance on the issue of independence or unification. Consensus already exists on the 1999 Resolution on Taiwan’s Future (台灣前途決議文), and again, there is no rush to amend this. However, the party does need to adopt a more practical position vis-a-vis China, with a more flexible policy. It needs to do more research into the China question and not unquestioningly dismiss contact with China. This will show both the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party that the DPP has an important part to play in cross-strait relations.
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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS