Fear is a powerful emotion. Major media outlets play on fear to draw in viewers and hold their attention. Book publishers relish opportunities to release titles that grab attention. For example, I once was told — semi-jokingly — that if I wanted to sell a lot of copies of my books, I should put a mushroom cloud over a picture of Taipei on the book cover. I declined that advice. But in the process, I was reminded that fear sells.
When fear intrudes on policymaking it can cloud sound judgments. There is a tension in government, though, because intelligence agencies are organized to alert their leaders to risks on the horizon, and security agencies are tasked with preparing to address those potential contingencies. It is left to leaders to weigh risks and provide guidance on most effective ways of mitigating them.
When leaders are overwhelmed by crises and potential contingencies, though, they risk losing initiative to drive their own affirmative agenda. They become beholden to events and reactive to the actions and decisions of others.
The very best leaders — those who define their times — find ways to convert challenges into opportunities to advance their own visions. In the United States, President Abraham Lincoln did not just manage a civil war, he also used the war as an opportunity to lay the groundwork for America’s post-war rehabilitation. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not just cope with the Great Depression. Rather, he used it as an impetus to restructure the American economy and put it on a footing to eventually triumph in World War II.
By dent of circumstances, and as surprising as it may seem, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) may have an analogous opportunity to advance an affirmative vision for Taiwan’s future prosperity and security. He confronts deep political divisions within the Legislative Yuan and mounting pressure from Beijing. To seize this moment, though, Lai will need to create opportunities to advance his own vision, as opposed to reacting to the actions of others.
The first 100 days of any presidency often are critical for setting the direction and vision for any administration. It is a time for bold new thinking. During the first 100 days of American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s presidency, for example, he implemented banking reform and financial regulation, launched a massive nationwide jobs creation program, instituted agricultural reform, established an electrification program for rural areas, and delivered housing assistance to Americans at risk of losing their homes. He secured approval of 16 major pieces of legislation, which permanently altered the government’s role in supporting American citizens facing economic and social challenges.
In the case of American President Lyndon Baines Johnson, he used his first 100 days to push through historic civil rights reform that expanded freedoms and prohibited discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Johnson also secured approval for government-provided health insurance for the elderly, helping to build America’s social safety net.
President Lai faces unique headwinds in using the start of his tenure to advance his agenda. He is taking over from President Tsai (蔡英文) and has retained many of her top advisors. He was elected with 40 percent of the popular vote and without a legislative majority. The Legislative Yuan has sucked up all of Taiwan’s political oxygen over debates about whether it has the constitutional right to enact revisions to the legislative-executive relationship, and with budget-busting infrastructure proposals. And Beijing has applied unrelenting pressure on Taiwan since President Lai’s inaugural address. This pressure has included a large-scale military exercise, new lawfare to threaten the death penalty against any “die-hard” Taiwan independence advocates, and diplomatic pressure through efforts to rally global support for China’s goal of unifying with Taiwan.
Even so, a crisis is a terrible thing to waste. China’s growing military pressure on Taiwan offers impetus for developing new capabilities and introducing new defense concepts. China’s bullying also reinforces Taiwan’s need to diversify its trade and economic relationships, including by working to accelerate efforts toward concluding phase two of the US-Taiwan Initiative on 21st Century Trade and locking in agreement around avoidance of US-Taiwan double taxation.
President Lai also has an opportunity to reach directly to the Taiwan public and paint a contrast between his focus on improving quality of life and the partisan brawling that has consumed the Legislative Yuan. The more he speaks directly to the Taiwan public about his plans for promoting greater access to housing, improving child support and long-term elder care, addressing stagnant wages, and supporting innovation through investments in research and development, the more likely voters will regard him as an agent of constructive change. Lai also will benefit from pushing publicly for his plans to strengthen Taiwan’s semiconductor industry and support Taiwan’s energy transition.
On cross-Strait issues, the more Lai can present himself as steady, principled, and committed to preserving the status quo, the better he will be able to focus international attention on the source of instability — Beijing. Lai does not benefit inside or outside of Taiwan by being seen as drawing ideological battle lines across the Taiwan Strait. The more he leans into democracy versus autocracy framing of cross-Strait differences, the more he risks being perceived abroad as a contributor to escalation, rather than as a seasoned statesman working to lower tensions.
Stoking fear may hold attention, but it does not solve problems. The more Lai can come to be seen as a creative and opportunistic problem-solver, the stronger he — and Taiwan — will become.
Ryan Hass is a senior fellow, the Chen-Fu and Cecilia Yen Koo Chair in Taiwan Studies, and the Director of the China Center at the Brookings Institution.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS