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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS