Ever since Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was nominated as the party’s presidential candidate, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has been challenging her on cross-strait issues. However, the KMT should realize that cross-strait policy might not be that important and focusing on it might not take the party anywhere.
Since Tsai declared that her cross-strait policy would be to maintain the “status quo” and push for cross-strait exchanges on the condition of an equal footing, KMT politicians — including President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) — have been pressing her to elaborate on what she means by “maintaining the status quo,” while calling on her to recognize the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Although KMT lawmakers believe that the issue of cross-strait relations will play a key role in January’s presidential and legislative elections, it is really not that important for Taiwanese voters.
According to the results of an opinion poll conducted by the Taiwan Brain Trust and released on Wednesday, only 5.9 percent of respondents said that cross-strait relations are something the next president should prioritize.
So what do voters want the next government to focus on? As many as 62.9 percent of respondents said they wanted an emphasis on economic development, 12.4 percent said government efficiency should be improved, and 8.8 percent said social fairness and justice should be a priority. The issue of cross-strait relations was identified as the fourth-most important issue.
Most Taiwanese know that the cross-strait “status quo” might not change any time soon and there are more pressing issues — such as low salaries, rising living costs, high property prices, food safety and inefficient government — that they would rather see resolved as soon as possible.
The majority of Taiwanese want the nation to become independent, yet they are concerned that a formal declaration of independence might provoke a Chinese invasion. Therefore, at the moment, they would rather Taiwan remain a de facto nation.
A similar pattern can be seen in various opinion polls. No matter which organization conducts the poll, the option of “maintaining the status quo” always receives the most support. However, when the “maintaining the status quo” option is taken out and respondents are asked to choose between “Taiwanese independence” and “unification with China,” the majority of respondents go for “Taiwanese independence” instead.
The Taiwan Brain Trust poll also garnered similar results: While 61.4 percent of respondents said that Taiwan should become an independent nation, only 12.3 percent supported unification with China. Also, 87 percent of respondents identified themselves as “Taiwanese,” while only 6.1 percent considered themselves “Chinese.”
This is perhaps why Tsai declared that she would strive to maintain the cross-strait “status quo,” and her declaration has won the support of more than 50 percent of respondents in every opinion poll conducted since.
As the DPP advocates Taiwan’s de jure independence, some people might fear that voting for the DPP could provoke a Chinese invasion. However, now that Tsai has promised to maintain the “status quo,” people should have nothing to worry about.
On the other hand, the KMT might exacerbate people’s fears if it keeps promoting closer ties with Beijing.
If the KMT is smart, it would stop talking about cross-strait relations and focus on domestic issues.
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