Wed, May 01, 2019 page3

• INTERVIEW: President a disappointment: ex-DPP member

  Michael Tsai, who was once blacklisted before returning to Taiwan in 1990 and participating in democratic movements, in an interview with Taipei Times reporter Huang Tai-lin expounded the reasons behind his decision to part ways with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) after 30 years of membership, expressing concerns that the party is drifting from its founding ideals

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  Taipei Times: You termed the DPP Central Executive Committee’s decision to delay the party’s presidential primary as the “last straw that broke the camel’s back” in your decision to quit the party. Why would you describe it that way?

  Michael Tsai (蔡明憲): The practice of holding presidential and legislative primaries has been in place in the DPP for more than two decades. The rules were set and people competed fairly and openly — that, is the value of democracy.

  In a departure from the past practice of beginning the presidential primary process in July or August, the committee this time finalized the timetable as early as mid-February, with registration to start on March 18.

  

  Taiwan United Nations Alliance president Michael Tsai speaks at a seminar in Taipei on April 2.

  Photo: Chang Chia-ming, Taipei Times

  That it moved forward the timetable so much smelled of something wrong, as if it was made under the promise that only President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) would be running in the primary, leaving other potential aspirants with little time to prepare.

  President Tsai has tried hard, yet has fared poorly in polls over the past one or two years, and it showed in the results of the local elections in November last year.

  Following the big defeats, many people, including me, had hoped that the president would engage in introspection and review what the DPP administration has failed to do well in its governance, as well as the public’s grievances and complaints.

  However, we see that she has done very little of that, even nothing. She has said that she has done a lot and well, and it is just that people do not know how to follow.

  Is it right to put the blame on the public? That I cannot accept.

  [Former premier] William Lai (賴清德) apparently sent party headquarters into a panic when he registered for the primary, because he enjoyed a high approval rate in [media] polls. Tsai would surely lose if party headquarters were to stick to the original timetable of conducting polls one month after the primary registration period closed.

  DPP headquarters has since [Lai’s registration] changed the schedule twice.

  The first time I could understand, because President Tsai was overseas making state visits, but the second time was wrong — it was clearly tailored for President Tsai. It was because she only has a 20-something percent approval rating and today still lags behind Lai by nearly 15 percentage points. So the committee, in support of her, changed the polling schedule.

  Democracy means being fair, reasonable and respectful, but the decision by DPP headquarters and the committee has been unfair to other contenders, as well as unreasonable and disrespectful to tradition.

  Over the past few years in particular, with President Tsai at the party’s helm, I have been very disappointed with her.

  From 2012 to 2016 when she was DPP chairperson, it was normal for her to want to appoint people from within her inner circle. However, they should be very objective and reasonable in making suggestions that reflected the opinions of the public.

  If the people in her inner circle are all “yes, sir, yes, ma’am” types, that would be problematic for her decisionmaking.

  For example, then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in 2012 wanted to abolish compulsory military conscription and institute an all-volunteer force instead. That was wrong, in my opinion, in light of Taiwan’s military capability, national defense and security in the face of China’s threats.

  Following suggestions from me, the Ministry of National Defense and even the US, Ma decided to delay implementation of the all-volunteer military until the end of 2013, then until his term was up [when he still did not implement it].

  Soon after Tsai Ing-wen assumed the presidency in 2016, her aides suggested that she institute an all-volunteer military. I penned suggestions to her on why the nation must keep both systems and the grave consequences there might be if we abolish mandatory conscription.

  My suggestions, tendered twice, fell on deaf ears. No response, not even a thank-you note.

  What happened to me was a small thing, but the point was that she should have at least consulted rather than simply decided so because she wanted peace with China.

  Sources in the National Security Council have told me that while they did discuss the matter, the political consideration was that because Ma had decided to abolish mandatory conscription, President Tsai would lose many votes if she went back on abolishment.

  Come on, what is more important, national security or electoral considerations?

  The issue of the military’s budget is another reason [for leaving the party]. I was involved in budget planning during my terms as vice minister of national defense from 2004 to 2006 and as minister of national defense in 2008. The proposed annual defense budget in 2008 — more than 10 years ago — was NT$330 billion [US$10.68 billion at the current exchange rate], about 2.7 to 2.8 percent of the nation’s GDP.

  In her presidential campaign, Tsai Ing-wen had pledged a defense budget of 3 percent of GDP, but from 2016 to now, the defense budget has been estimated at NT$340 billion annually, nearly same as that 10 years ago.

  It was good that the president in various speeches emphasized the importance of national defense, as that boosted morale. However, the thing is, when you look from the nation’s perspective, what have been the actual actions?

  TT: Having been a defense minister, are you worried about the Tsai administration’s national security team?

  Michael Tsai: Not just worried, but desperate.

  China’s military might continues to increase. As early as last year, when Chinese jets began circling Taiwan, I suggested that the president — the commander-in-chief — or the defense minister must firmly condemn China’s aggressive, provocative actions.

  However, none of that happened, except for a statement from the Ministry of National Defense’s spokesman saying that “we maintain monitoring of any movement by the Chinese.”

  That statement was nothing in China’s eyes.

  It was not until early last month, when a pair of Chinese jets crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, that the president condemned China. That was good, but China has already seen that President Tsai is weak. So, a few days after its jets flew over the median line, China conducted another drill involving 24 aircraft and five naval vessels near Taiwan’s waters — a move that obviously “digs deep on soft soil” (軟土深掘).

  TT: After announcing that you would quit the party, Eastern Taiwan Society vice president Winston Yu (余文儀) followed suit. What has gone wrong with the DPP? What would you say is the soul of the party?

  Michael Tsai: Since its founding in 1988, the DPP’s ideology has been very clear. The passage of the Taiwan independence clause in 1991 that stated its pursuit for a new and independent Taiwan has been the party’s goal.

  The 1999 Resolution on Taiwan’s Future stated that the party recognized that Taiwan is already an independent, sovereign state named the Republic of China; that it advocates for a referendum on UN membership; and that the future of Taiwan must be decided by its 23 million citizens. All of that is the DPP’s soul, the party’s core values.

  In our opinion, the party, chaired by Tsai Ing-wen for many years and led by her as president these past three years, has drifted from those values.

  In November last year, the pro-localization camp put forward a referendum seeking to change the nation’s name from “Chinese Taipei” to “Taiwan” at next year’s Tokyo Olympics.

  We had hoped that President Tsai, who then doubled as DPP chairperson, would support the cause.

  Not only did she not endorse it, she also instructed all DPP staff and officials not to petition in support of the referendum.

  Why? Did those actions not increase the distance from the party’s soul? It hurts.

  Over the past three years, I have been the president of the Taiwan United Nations Alliance, which for 15 years has campaigned for Taiwan to join the WHO and the UN. Every year, I have requested that the president hold an international news conference to publicize Taiwan’s appeals to take part in the international organizations, but she did not want to.

  The only conclusion I could reach was that she is worried about displeasing China. Why the concern?

  It is hurtful to see the US Congress and former US secretary of health and human services Tom Price, as well as Japan and Canada, voice support for us, and yet our own government and legislature do nothing of the kind.

  I am disappointed — what the Tsai administration is doing is drifting away from the DPP’s founding ideals.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Actress Barbie Hsu dies of pneumonia at 48

  • 2

    CDC advises people to get vaccinated against flu

  • 3

    Late derby drama keeps Inter in title race

  • 4

    Marines to protect Songshan airport

  • 5

    US lawmakers introduce resolution to annul ‘one China’