DPP- A Taiwan Tragedy

DPP- A Taiwan Tragedy

DPP used to be a well organized and effective political movement. Its platform of democratic reform and Taiwan independence attracted wide support, especially among the professionals and intelligentsia, and it was highly skilled in combining street demonstrations and journalistic declarations that caught the Kuomingtang government in an awkward position of not being able to either suppress it nor to let it be. DPP implemented a successful programme of gradual takeover of municipal governments, where its officials were able to demonstrate administrative competence and personal integrity, till it controlled a larger part of Taiwan than Kuomingtang officials, and was able, with the help of Kuomingtang internal division (deliberately or otherwise engineered by Lee Teng Hui and James Soong), win the 2000 presidential election.

Since then it has gone steadily downhill. Faced with a legislature with an opposition majority, it attempted to implement its policies through various types of manouvre; with an economic system still containing strong public participation because of past government investment initiatives, it attempted to wrest control of major corporations and regulatory bodies by displacing past KMT appointees with its own followers. While these are to be expected, they gave scope for improper procedures and corrupt practices, which could have been controlled if the individuals showed greater public spirit, farsightedness, professionalism and self discipline, or if the party machinery, prosecution system and journalists had played a more competent and less partisan role. Whereas corruption existed before, it had been carried out in a more orderly and less blatant manner, whereas today both the administration and the corruption have become amateur and out of control.

While a number of intellectuals previously close to DPP were at last driven to sign a declaration demanding the resignation of Chen Shuibian in early July 2006, the DPP party congress chose to pretend that everyone was fine, and the only problem they had to solve was intra party faction fighting, and passed a meaningless resolution to dissolve factions. Individuals who previously made some critical remarks against low moral standards, all toed the line at the congress and went along with the inaction, for fear that any negative display would cause Chen and his supporters to switch resources and votes to rivals in the party. In other words, they acted to protect their current "local optimum", knowing very well that the party as a whole will continue to slide to its "global minimum" when each individual acts this way.

DPP never had an effective China policy; in consequence, it also had no economic policy in view of the importance of China for the economy of Taiwan, and no diplomatic policy since China looms so large in Taiwan's relationship with the rest of the world in particular USA. Now it has shown itself to have no internal policy either. The party still has a large body, but events have shown that it has a empty mind. Whatever ideas it might have had, it has shown itself to care so much about power and money that it can, and indeed has, given up everything else.

It now has to convince the taiwanese people that, despite its complete lack of mental aptitude, it deserves their votes in the Taipei-Gaoxiong elections coming up later this year, the legislature election next year, and the presidential election in 2008. How will it fare? Who knows. Maybe an empty-headed DPP is exactly what Taiwan likes to have, and that it finds happiness sharing the great tragedy.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=70

2000

Chen Tangshan - A Taiwan Tragedy

1987 1988 1 992 1993 1212 .19971366%

200020012004420048()

2006120067

196540199419941997199820002005

2006

A taiwan tragedy - Long Yingtai

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=112

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=70

http://forums.chinatimes.com.tw/report/lonin/l_main.htm

http://bloguide.ettoday.com/faye/textview.php?file=0000024443

http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/newslist/newslist-content/0,3546,110501...

http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/6/6/28/n1366145.htm

http://blog.chinatimes.com/Taipeijk/archive/2006/07/21/80780.html

Long Yintai is a very well know person in Taiwan, a scholar cum commentator cum once government official who was at the forefront of the drive towards democracy and open society. In Singapore she is mainly known for her remark "I am glad I am not Singaporean", indicating her disapproval of what she saw as the backward state of democracy and press freedom.

Singapore is a small country that places much emphasis on comments by well known overseas people, even negative ones, since they at least show the country is worth noticing. Not only are such comments regularly carried in the local media, with the benefit of showing that press freedom exists, later words of such critics are followed and they are frequently invited back to get to know the place better, in the hope that they would make more positive comments subsequently, thus affirming the merits of the Singapore way of doing things. Li Ao, for example, understood this very well. After his 2005 trip to China, during which he sang three different tunes in speeches at three universities (it is said he received a warning after his first speech in Beijing, causing him to say good things about the communist party afterwards), thus putting the verdict on his visit at risk, as soon as he got off the plane he tried to change the subject with comments like "Singaporeans are less smart". Later he offered to visit Singapore and clarify his views by speaking at universities, an offer that expired from lack of response. (I made some comments on this

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=112

This is a kind of win-win dynamic between the overseas critics and the Singapore establishment.

There is no doubt the political scene and public life of Taiwan are much more lively than Singapore's. Taiwan, however, faces serious problems

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=70

and it cannot simply depend on freeranging discussions to ensure that the best ideas will prevails, nor on quarrels between political parties and factions to ensure that the right policies will be adopted and implemented. In particular, the ruling DPP has not found it possible to come up with a set of policies for dealing with mainland China which would be acceptable to its own supporters and the mainland side. In this area Long Yingtai had no idea to offer; her most prominent efforts have been her mocking treatment of the mainland visit of the Kuomingtang team under Lian Zhan and her demands to Hu Jingtao to change his views to be more in tune with the thinking of the people of Taiwan.

http://forums.chinatimes.com.tw/report/lonin/l_main.htm

Considering, however, that despite the high profile treatment given to her during her visits to Singapore, a small country of 3M citizens, it has not adopted her suggestions, it is hard to envisage Hu, who has to deal with problems of 1.3B people, could easily make changes in the mainland political system because of what she said.

With numerous scandals plaguing the highest levels of the Taiwan government, originating in the poor self-discipline of members of the Taiwan elite (on both partisan sides) and the failure of the former one-party government to put in place an effective public monitoring and prosecution system needed in the new open environment, Long Yingtai also had very little to say. Instead, she praised the failed impeachment effort as proof of Taiwan's working democracy:

http://bloguide.ettoday.com/faye/textview.php?file=0000024443

http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/newslist/newslist-content/0,3546,110501...

http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/6/6/28/n1366145.htm

In other words, while your house is on fire, you praise the presence of water hybrants on the side of the street as example of good urban planning. This display of the impotence of a democratic and open society can only be described as Taiwan's tragedy.

Poor Li Ao; so soon after he said Taiwanese are smarter than Singaporeans, all those scandals broke out surrounding Chen Shuibian, and the Taiwan government is virtually in paralysis. It will be embarrassing to be asked "now what do you say?"; on the other hand, it will perhaps be even more painful to him if nobody remembers it or bothers to ask; Li Ao does not like to be neglected; if asked, I am sure he would be able to make up some answer, which may or may not be consistent with what he said in the past, which may or may not even make sense in itself, but it gives him another chance to get his name into international papers...

In this way, he is really very similar to Chen Shuibian, which is why, despite his reputation for relentlessness on people in power, especially authoritarians, he has seldom criticized Chen.

Poor Li Ao

the article below was written in early 2001, but the terrorist acts on World Trade Center and Pentagon have change things. USA will be too preoccupied with the Middle East to devote effort to Taiwan independence; it may have the desire to promote it, but may not have the will, nor the spare means.

The China Legacy of George Bush

Which George Bush? The two Bushs are conjoint in this, and both derive from the legacy of Ronald Reagan.

The saying goes that Some are born to greatness; some achieve it; and some have greatness thrust upon them. Safe from contradiction by the dementia ridden Reagan, one can thrust all kinds of greatness on him. Domestically, his "voodoo economics" tax cuts are supposed to have made American economy more efficient by forcing people and businesses to rely less on the government; internationally, his threat of "star wars" exploited superior American technology in control engineering and computer hardware to start an arms race that bankrupted the racially unstable Soviet Union, which officially broke up during the presidency of Bush Senior, who went on to the spectacular gulf war victory.

China was Bush Senior's domain of expertise, but China gave his presidency a rocky start, when the aging party leadership of Beijing, instead of caving in to student demands, sent tanks into Tiananmen Square, and instead of collapsing in the face of international disapproval and isolation, presided over an astounding phase of economic progress. It would have been galling for the Bushs to watch the slick but ethically dubious Bill Clinton go to China and curry favour by announcing his opposition to Taiwan independence. Having evened the score with Clinton by defeating his chosen successor Gore, it is time for Bush to try to initiate the disintegration of the Chinese evil empire in the same way Reagan did with SU.

The Bushs know many "good Chinese", Hongkong migrants managing chopsuey restaurants in Houston and Washington DC, Taiwanese engineers in high tech companies, and mainland computer programmers running internet sites. These people obviously admire the American way of life, and their friends back home obviously think similarly; the "bad Chinese" are the communist leaders who impose a contrary ideology on a powerless population, which await American leadership towards freedom and democracy. Such a lagacy, which eluded his father, seems within the grasp for George W, and the starting point must be Taiwan.

For over fifty years America has held its hand on Taiwan independence. It has never publicly said "we encourage it", nor even "we will defend Taiwan if it declares independence". USA even came near to accepting the One China stand, with the joint declaration when establishing diplomatic relation with Beijing "USA acknowledges that both sides of the Taiwan Straits accept the principle of One China, and does not dispute it", which however leaves the wriggle room: if Taiwan no longer accepts One China, then USA is free to follow suit.

USA has deliberately left its stand on Taiwan ambiguous because it wants Taiwan to make its own effort and sacrifice for independence first, without a guarantee of underwriting from USA. In the same way, USA and Western Europe affirmed the integrity of Yugoslavia, without giving it any help to arrest the process of disintegration, and continue to affirm the current status of Bosnia and Kosovo despite their obvious untenability.

But this ambiguity would not last much longer, for George W only has another seven and half years, at most, to create his legacy on top of the legacies of Reagan and Bush Senior. He is however mistaken about one thing: the division between "good Chinese" and "bad Chinese" is much more subtle than Americans figure it. The majority of Chinese, on both Mainland and Taiwan, who admire America, admire it as a powerful and resourceful opponent, rather than as a good friend. One can do business with an opponent, even obtain patronage from him, but that is not the same as friendship.

When the US spy plane was forced to land on Hainan island, there was little sympathy for US demands for immediate release of plane and crew ANYWHERE in Asia, Taiwan included, for USA was seen as the powerful party using its superior technology to pry secrets from a weaker opponent, a bully. Even the most pro-independence Taiwanese would have considerable misgivings about American support: it is absolutely necessary, yet dangerous to rely on. If it comes to war, and Taiwan suffers from missile showers and sea blockades, the people would be asking "why are we doing this? why are we helping USA to achieve its geopolitical objectives?"

In summary, George Bush's pursuit of his China legacy is a highly risky move, for Taiwan as well as for himself. It might have been better to just praise Reagan, bury him, and forget him.
-----------
Taiwan Independence policy

Is it right for taiwan to seek independence? This is not really a very useful question to ask. Historically, China has a clear claim of sovereignty to Taiwan, but history is also full of cases of parts of countries going independent. The real issue is whether the vast majority of Taiwanese believe in it and know how to go about it in the right way. So far, they have been in a muddle.

We often heard "Taiwan would suffer economically if it was part of China." So does it mean that when China is prosperous, it becomes a good idea to be part of China? Or "Taiwan is free and democratic while China is authoritarian." So if China reforms itself, then independence would no longer be a good idea? Maybe Taiwanese people should work to improve China rather than put their effort into separation? Indeed many business people investing in China use that justification, instead of the purpose of making money, but in doing so, they have already made independence a more difficult policy.

While both sides would suffer economically in case of hostility, China is willing to accept this and, being much larger, can cope with the consequences better. For years Taiwan had hoped that the economic cooperation would make China more amenable to treating it as an equal; it is only now facing up to the reality that the situation is the reverse. That China has been taken a superior, bullying attitude towards Taiwan, or Taiwanese are genetically different from Han Chinese, etc, might make good cocktail conversation, but are irrelevant as arguments for independence.

A real issue Taiwan has not faced up to is the anti-independence minority. Right now, close to a million Taiwanese people live on the mainland, with 300 thousand in Shanghai alone. Is everyone comfortable with their staying there if a separation occurs, and would others still in Taiwan be allowed to follow, taking their money with them? Would those who stay behind be allowed the political freedom to work for reunification? It is certainly not going to be practical policy to pretend that the problem does not exit.

It seems to me that Taiwan has been assuming that, since for all practical purpose it is already independent, full independence can be obtained merely by getting other nations to recognize it as independent and by joining world bodies as a member equal to China. They have even now not given up on this simplistic idea, as in the 2002 visit of vice president Lu to Indonesia: stopped at Jakarta airport and sent to Bali, she declared it a human rights violation to stop her from having a holiday, then got help from the Indonesian Golkar Party to enter Jakarta via chartered flight to make an interparty visit, thus changing her story half way - so maybe China was correct to protest against a visit since it was not just a holiday? Furthermore, by demonsrating the open split within the Indonesian political system, her visit was hardly a good way to make friends. (The problems during Mrs Chen's visit to America were less fundamental, merely diplomatic inexperience. A new attempt to sneak Chen Sui Bian himself into Indonesia in December 2002 failed when the news leaked in Jakarta papers just before departure. Even when the 2004 referendum proposal attracted US criticism, the immediate reaction was to send another delegation to visit worldwide, and as soon as the election was over, the vice president went on a trip, deliberately getting two stopovers in USA, but was only allowed to use west coast cities away from the political centre. The same happened with Chen's own trip to South America.)

The Taiwanese governments (both DPP and KMT) and people are so used to doing this that they fail to see the rest of world would in due course get fed up with the tactic; there might be initial sympathy when attempts to have "relations" are thwarted by China, big bullying small, and anyone criticizing the tactic as unproductive, in taiwan and outside, are conveniently attacked as sucking up to the big, undemocratic bully, but it wont be long before everyone develops a thicker skin, ignores the name calling, and goes where their interests lie. The trouble with Singapore, whose deputy prime minister (and soon to be PM) made a "private" visit to meet Chen Shuibian despite Chinese criticism, then attempting to mollify china by repeatedly and very visibly re-iterating its opposition to taiwan independence, shows a pattern that is going to be repeated with others. Even real friends of Taiwan do not like to be put on the spot to choose sides, and repeatedly.

The example of Tibet should provide a sobering lesson: it was de facto independent for half a century, and hoped to use British and Indian help to establish its full independence status. Yet, despite the very weak claim of sovereignty China had over Tibet, the Tibetans were unsuccessful. While the reasons for their failure were complex, their lack a of simple and coherent stand was certainly a contributing factor. While today the Tibetans extoll Dalai Lama, in the 50s they were much more divided. Religion was considered by many to be backward superstition, while China represented both modernity and anti-imperialism, versus British exploiting opportunities to take territory from Tibet. In due course, China made good its claim.

When masses have to be mobilized for a tough and dangerous struggle, a simple and coherent message is vital - any complicating factors would become excuses for hesitation and backsliding. But simple messages are often also slightly dishonest, since they ignore inconvenient complexities. A degree of ruthlessness and cunning is always necessary to come up with messages that are sufficiently based on reality to be creditable, but not hesitating to sweep inconvenient quibbles aside. Up to now, I do not see such a mental framework on the part of the independence advocates.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked several people from PRC and they all thought war unlikely, in fact because they are contemptuous of Chen Shuibian (he is just trying to win election), but I think this is precisely the kind of thinking that leads to war

it is quite correct that none of the three sides china taiwan usa want a war, but that's almost irrelevant; anyone seriously relying on that really doesnt have a meaingful view on this

it is also quite true that taiwan would not dare to declare independence without usa support, and usa does not want to support and load itself with responsibility; but that too is little comfort; the whole point is Chen Shuibian using every opportunity to manouvre usa into a situation when not supporting would be seen as weak and may threaten usa's international position and internal consensus; people should take note of how successfully he has manouvred KMT from its previous positions

in his attempt to manouvre usa, his intention is of course to avoid war, hoping that usa would frighten off china; but china would be manouvring usa from the other direction, and the process can get more complex than any side was prepared for: in order to prevent usa from supporting taiwan independence openly, china may have to say "we will take military action even if usa gets involved", and manouvre itself into a position of no retreat

similary, Taiwan may work itself into a position of no return: it has to take the posture of not being afraid of war, indeed, of being prepared for it, as Chen came close to saying in the Washingtonpost interview soon after his reelection; in fact the reporter believes he implied it; the comment of Premier Yu that taiwan need to be able to strike back with missiles confirmed the idea in a more open manner, though recently it has become unfashionable to lable this kind of macho stanze as taiwan patriotism

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

added in March 2005: a KMT delegation is about to visit the mainland, first to pay respect to various KMT monuments, then to meet the chairman of the political consultative committee (united front) in beijing, marking the first official KMT-Chinese Communist Party contact in a decade (or half a century, since the 1992 discussion was formally between two NGOs); this would have been unthinkable just a couple of years ago, since DPP would have been able to attack it as betrayal of taiwan, but curiously, Chen Shuibian's own attempt to label names like Republic of China as anti-taiwan, has made association with such names favorable to the mainland, while taiwanese gradually accepted the names as mere "historical formality". In short, a safe gap now exists for an anti independence minority to function in taiwan for at least the moment, allowing China to give concessions to Taiwan while letting non-government parties to take credit

Taiwan's Twin Tragedy

when terrorists rode the two airliners into WTC, they did severe but temporary damages to NY and USA, but permanent damages to Taiwan: preoccupied with the middle-east, George Bush had to ease off from his previous "whatever it takes" defense of the place, but even greater damage came from within: elected with great hope for a new era for taiwan starting in 2000, Chen Shuibian had by September 2001 already begun to show weak competency of governance; by then rumours were spreading that Zhang Junxiong, the second premier he appointed since taking office, was already in a shaky position (the first was Tang Fei, a Guomindang veteran, in the hope of utilizing the greater experience of the opposition party in administration, but he hardly lasted a year); Zhang managed to survive only to 2002, and his successors You, Xie and Su did not last much longer either. Other cabinet members also tended to have short tenures, in particular the financial minister - there were six of them in as many years, one more than premiers.

Instead of taking a back seat as prescribed in the constitution, Chen and his staff in the presidential office constantly interfered in ministerial appointments and appointments of senior executives of publicly owned corporations and regulatory bodies, as well as major administrative decisions, making it almost impossible for the premier and his ministers to deal effectively with queries and criticisms from parliamentary members and reporters

But worse was to come, starting from the first half of 2006, previous unconfirmed rumours of bribery involving presidential staff and Chen family members began to be backed up by solid evidence, starting with a photo showing several senior officials at a casino in Korea, after they denied making the visit paid for by corporations involved in major government contract work. Soon almost everyone working in close proximiy to Chen was found to be involved in something or other, with the large items concerning his wife! Curiously, somehow his Democratic Progressive Party members always managed to uphold their faith in him, with the support only starting to crumble now.

The greatest beneficiary of the twin taiwan catastrophies has been the Beijing government, which has been concerned, with increasing stridency as yeara passed, about the taiwan independence threat. With US support in doubt and its own leaders in disarray if not discredit, whether through their own involvement in corruption or by their support for those involved, the independence movement has gutted itself from within.

911 2000 2001 9200266

2006 -

How long can Chen Shuibian last?

I have no special source of information, just a matter of common sense. It hinges on one's estimate of the outcome of the 2008 election. If it is obvious that DPP cannot win, then by resigning before the end of his term and allowing Vice President Lv Xiulian to take over, he can obtain a parden from Lv. As long as there is a fighting chance that DPP might still win, he would not quit.

As for when this prospect becomes certain, it would have to be 2007. At the end of 2006 there will be elections of the mayors of Taipei and Gaoxiong. Assuming that the DPP vote % is miserably low, the current wavering supporters, including the prospective 2008 presidential candidates and their support groups, who are still unwilling to antagonize Chen for fear of losing out in the intra party competition, and the various pro-DPP tycoons whose financial support is needed, would finally abandon him. He would be asked to quit before the 2007 legislature election, in the hope of making the party look a bit better during the campaign, and be promised a pardon, maybe for himself only, maybe for his family as well, after the election is over and the pardon would no longer affect the outcome.

2008/2008 200820062007

I dont think the time for resignation has arrived yet, and Chen Shuibian would try to provide a legal defense with some sort of promise to quit if conviction ensures; however, the support he managed to rebuild in the last couple of months (partly due to the alienation of public feelings by the disruptive protest movements) will start to crumble, building up to a climax around New Year.

see also

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=204

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=204

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-XIIfDzQobqO5oCYM9UTvZzgKHH4Org--?cq=1&p=212

added on 11 Nov:

the nobel laureate Li Yuanzhe's open letter calling on Chen to "consider" going is among the first steps of this process of crumbling; Li's endorsement of Chen in 2000 played a major part in pushing him over the top

2000

added on 13 Nov:

Several DPP seniors have started to mildly suggest that Chen considers stepping down, with one pointing out the legal issue that an amnesty can only be given after conviction so that he need to do it early to ensure end of trial occurs while Lv Xiulian is still president; however, I think this is mistaken: Chen can plead guilty and avoid a lengthy trial. Still, I give him till early 2007 as the crumbling pocess takes time.

2007

added further on 13 Nov

in another step of the process of crumbling support, two DPP parliament members have quit to protest against the party's support for Chen

added on 22 Nov

ma yinjiu's problem with procedures for utilizing special allowance funds is a godsend to abian; he might again rebuild his support base

added on 29 Nov

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2006/11/29/2003338366

another step in the crumbling process: chen's long term assistant luo wenjia spoke out about the mistake of starting on the wrong foot by lying, and then having to tell more lies to cover the initial lie

added on 15 Nov: it seems the twin catastrophies are growing into 2.5: Ma Yinjiu has been dragged into the issue because some of his Mayor expense accounts have similar problems, that reimbursement claims were sometimes made with unrelated invoices; his defense was that many small items were claimed together using a large, unrelated item invoice for the sake of convenience; technically, this is still a violation of rules, and there is the problem of whether the small items were proper expenditures under the budge in the first place; his supporters have since requested the same investigation into various DPP's accounts, which most probably have similar violations, so the issue is going to snowball

I am amazed at taiwan's capacity to self destruct, not just in the cost to the people concerned, but also the time spent by those who attack them; no one gets any work done

,

added on 7 May 2007: the 2008 presidential race will be between Ma Yingjiu and Xie Changting - both under the shadow of being charged for corruption, Ma already under legal proceedings while Xie's case is still pending. Now that too is a nice reflection of Taiwan's situation, quite aside from the fairness of the accusations.

2008

安得廣廈千萬間 請吳院長看看台灣外籍人才的荒謬處境