President Chen Shui-bian (
Meanwhile, People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Undoubtedly, these four politicians have stolen all the limelight so far in the run-up to the Decem-ber elections for legislators, mayors and county commissioners. These superstars, strong in personal charisma, are in the spotlight and are hyping an otherwise cold and cheerless campaign.
Party candidates, however, have not benefited from this livening-up of the campaign because they are being outshone by the superstars. If the four superstars are viewed as the red blossoms, the candidates do not even qualify as green leaves. The candidates' are largely indistinguishable and their political differences are likewise forgettable. The only thing left is the four superstars' war of words.
Such a "quasi-presidential election campaign" involving a president, former president and former presidential candidates is inimical to the development of Taiwan's political democracy as voters lose perspective on what the election is about -- local issues.
Conflict among Taiwan's various ethnic groups is also being stirred up. The people are easily incited by the cacophony of TV call-in shows and politicians readily stoop to inflammatory rhetoric.
In such circumstances, back-room negotiations and the pointed political packaging of legislation are so common that it is barely possible to control the quality of legislation. This being so, those few legislators who focus on their legislative duties are like a rare, endangered species.
The overwhelming use of political superstars to campaign for the candidates militates not only against improving the quality of the legislature, but also against election results favorable to the parties themselves.
Under the current multi-member district system, winning more votes doesn't necessarily amount to winning more seats, because celebrity candidates may be "vote suckers" (吸票機), reducing the prospects for success of the parties' other candidates running in the same electoral district. Only with an even distribution of votes can the DPP become the majority party in the legislature.
As for the PFP, the scenario can be summed up by the old Chinese saying, "One general achieves renown over the dead bodies of 10,000 soldiers." Soong's cult of personality as a campaign tool is as yet untested by the unforgiving forge of a real election.
As far as the TSU is concerned, voters only know Lee, the party's spiritual leader, but are at a loss to name any of its candidates. It is very difficult for a candidate to stand out in a campaign that solely focuses on the "red blossoms," instead of the "green leaves." As a result, it seems highly improbable that political newcomers or others who are barely known can win.
Those parties that are not good at mobilizing their party machinery depend too much on supporters' desire to do the right thing. If there is a wide disparity between the relative strengths of a party's candidates, the distribution of ballots will be uneven and its number of seats will drop. This is a problem that will most likely afflict the DPP and the PFP.
Analysis of the legislative elections for the Fourth Legislative Yuan in 1998 shows that DPP candidates in three electoral districts were not elected because some of the party's celebrity candidates attracted a disproportionate number of votes. This also happened to the KMT in one electoral district, showing that its nomination strategy was more successful because its candidates were able to share the ballots more evenly. With such experience, the KMT may win more seats in this election, since competition is even tougher this time around.
At a time when the DPP hopes to win 85 legislative seats while other parties are striving to take as many seats as they can, party leaders have to act as mother hens and ensure an even distribution of ballots.
Due to the nature of the election this time, nevertheless, new faces or those with little fame will not likely achieve success without being strongly promoted. Thus, the long-term effect of the four political superstars on the campaign may be that the strong remain strong while the weak remain weak.
Lee Ching-hsiung is a Taiwan Independence Party legislator.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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