Not long ago, Vice President and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate William Lai (賴清德) published an article titled “My Plan to Preserve Peace in the Taiwan Strait” in the Wall Street Journal, proposing a “four-pillar plan” for peace and prosperity — including bolstering Taiwan’s military deterrence, treating economic security as national security, developing partnerships with the world’s democracies, and steady and principled cross-strait leadership.
The four pillars’ careful arguments are straightforward and show Lai’s stature, while highlighting the major drawbacks of other candidates who lack the core ideas of national development.
The four pillars are a clear discourse on the key issues in Taiwan. Whether the nation should enhance its defense deterrence is an issue that the presidential candidates cannot avoid talking about. They should make it clear whether they want to support the country’s domestic manufacture of submarines, national defense autonomy and strengthening defense capabilities.
Also, they should make it clear whether to support extending the mandatory military service from four months to one year. They should not first claim to resume the short-term four-month service, then use the premise of cross-strait peace for resuming the service. If they try to avoid the problem in this way, voters can see through their tricks.
As Lai made a clear statement on economic security and partnerships with the world’s democracies, other candidates should also state their positions on these matters and whether they want to continue to rely on China economically.
A steady and principled leadership to cross-strait relations is perhaps the Achilles’ heel of other candidates. Compared with their wavering discourses on cross-strait policies, Lai’s clear stance provides voters with an explicit reference to make a choice.
The presidential election is not a child’s game and it is a candidate’s commitment to his national development vision. Each candidate must present their own policies and state where they want to lead the country. They should not aim to fool voters with election slogans calling for the DPP to be “pulled off the shelves” or the formation of a great opposition alliance. For the majority of voters, the presidential election is neither a feud nor a confrontation full of hatred among local factions.
Those running for president must have a clear plan and vision for national development and tell voters which direction they would lead Taiwan, so voters can choose accordingly. If they curry favor with a specific ethnic group, ally with other candidates and only focus on trivia during their campaign, they would be putting the cart before the horse.
Recently, Lai also proposed an annual subsidy plan for students attending private universities. This does not involve unification or independence and has nothing to do with whether you are blue or green, as it simply takes young people’s future into consideration. Other candidates not only fail to propose similar policies, but they also criticize Lai for spending taxpayers’ money just to attract votes. They try to stimulate voters’ anger without discussing the subsidy completely.
As of today, Lai has already shaped his discourse, showing his attitude toward the presidency. Hopefully, other candidates would follow up quickly and make their discourse clear and definite.
Wang Chih-chien is a distinguished professor at National Taipei University’s Graduate Institute of Information Management.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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