"Fate protects fools, children, and ships named Enterprise."
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday March 16 2005
Special Report: March Against “Anti-Secession” Law
Last Sunday several hundred thousand Taiwanese marched in Taipei to protest mainland China’s “anti-secession” law. The fact that Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian broke precedent by taking part in the march personally has affected the domestic political situation and created the possibility that the recent warming in relations, marked especially by the historic Lunar New Year flights, might have been for nothing. This week’s report will describe the nature of the protests while paying particular attention to discrepancies with reports in Western news sources, describe the probable domestic repercussions, and conclude by examining possibilities for cross-strait relations in the future.
Although most news agencies outside of Taiwan reported that around a million people took part in the march, it should be noted that Taipei’s police department put the estimated number at a little over 200,000. Moreover, many polls indicated that a significant amount of Taiwanese were opposed to the march because of fears that it would provoke China. Although some American newspapers described this as simply a march to oppose China’s “anti-secession” law, your correspondent, who attended the march, found this not quite to be the case. Many groups participating were extremely anti-China. Signs saying “Fuck China” or “China is the Devil” were common. Some groups called not only for independence from China, but to actively work to undermine the Chinese Communist Party. Because Chen joined the march along with such groups as these, the fact that their presence was not highlighted by Taiwanese or Western news sources may have been a fortunate accident.
The fact that President Chen personally marched is significant because of his recent overtures to a pro-Chinese political party, the People First Party. The PFP Chairman had urged Chen not to participate in the talks and to rather take the high ground. However, Chen had recently been losing support from his own pro-independence camp because of his promises to the PFP Chairman, namely, not to pursue independence during the rest of his final presidential term. Chen’s use of the march to reclaim leadership of the pan-green (pro-independence alliance) may have upset his alliance with PFP, and also thereby hurt future chances of improving cross-strait relations. He did not, however, make a speech to the demonstrators, which can be seen as a concession to the PFP. A speech would have been seen as much more inflammatory to the CCP.
Despite threats that Taiwan would adapt some type of legislation to respond to the anti-secession law, it seems that this will not be the case. In fact, the Taiwanese government has been relatively mild in its concrete response to the anti-secession law, despite very loudly expressing disappointment and frustration. Although possibilities for more direct flights have been put on hold, it seems that no more significant responses on the Taiwanese side are in the making. Rather, it seems that the Taiwanese government is waiting for more signs from across the strait before making any decisions. It seems that this may be a wise course of action, as Condoleezza Rice recently commented in an interview that CCP officials promised that after the anti-secession law was passed they would take steps to lower cross-strait tensions.
It should be noted as an aside that despite the historic march, the biggest news story in Taiwan recently has been the announcement by a former independence-supporting businessman that he supports the anti-secession law and that reunification was the only practical future for Taiwan. Xu Wen-long of the Chimei Group claimed that the anti-secession law was helpful for businessmen to understand that investing in the mainland had to be done under the understanding that reunification was a historical inevitability. However, Xu’s previous support for independence causes makes this declaration quite surprising. It is suspected that this “change of mind” is due to pressure from the CCP. If this is the case, it would seem that China is increasing pressure on Taiwanese businessmen not to support independent causes. If seen in concert with the anti-secession law, it would seem that China is increasing its tough policies with China. Chinese President Hu Jintao has talked of a “hard-soft” approach with China. This pressure on Taiwanese businessmen, along with the anti-secession law, can be seen as the hard-approach. Taiwan is now waiting to see if the “soft” side of China is next on the agenda.
Historic Trip to China by KMT Officials
One of the vice-presidents of the Nationalist Party (KMT) recently traveled to China to pave the way for a trip by the KMT President, Lien Chan, sometime in the near future. This is a historic trip, the first by KMT officials on an official visit since 1949. Several officials in the ruling Democratic Progressive Party have described this as a selling out to China during a time requiring national unity in the face of the “anti-secession” law.
The KMT official, P.K. Chiang, will meet with a member of the Chinese Standing Committee of the Politburo, Jia Qinglin. Chen Yunlin, who is in charge of the government department charged with dealing with the Taiwanese question may also sponsor a dinner for Chiang.
Chiang has said that this trip shows that the Chinese are only willing to deal with the KMT, not with the more independence leaning DPP. However, Chiang has no right to negotiate with the CCP. A Taiwanese government official said of the trip that, “Any such negotiations have to be first authorized by the MAC (Mainland Affairs Commission.” Both sides of the political aisle in Taiwan will try to use this trip as a political weapon. However, it is clearly a historical occasion, especially if it clears the way for Lien Chan to travel to the mainland.
So, Captain, how long shall we stare at each other across the Neutral Zone?
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday March 16 2005
Special Report: Anti-Secession Law
This past Monday the People’s Republic of China passed a law with a clause regarding the possible use of “non-peaceful” measures to solve the Taiwan question, sparking major political repercussions in Taiwan and reactions from countries throughout the world. This week’s report will begin by examining the contents of the law itself, and how it has been presented by the Chinese Communist Party to the outside world. It will then examine the Taiwanese reaction and the foreseeable future for cross-strait relations. Finally, international reactions will be discussed.
Most of the law in question actually has to do with peaceful reconciliation of Taiwan and China. The law describes ways in which Taiwan and China can cooperate pending a final status solution, and assures sincerity on the side of the Chinese. However, one clause does include the possibility of using force against Taiwan. Under three conditions, China can “legally” use “non-peaceful” measures to solve the Taiwan question. If the Taiwanese are about to enact legal independence, an “incident” makes independence imminent, or if all possibilities for peaceful resolution are gone, China then must consider using force. The law also says that no outside interference should be tolerated. It should be noted, however, that the law was changed since it was first introduced, a fact that is both overlooked by most reports and was seen by most analysts as unusual. One clause was changed from, “Taiwan is a part of China” to “Taiwan and China constitute a single China.” However, the former line was entered at a different part of the law. Another change was that the law originally read that non-peaceful means of unification would be used if all conditions for peaceful reunification were gone. It was amended to say non-peaceful means would be used if all possibility for peaceful reunification were gone. These changes, along with other several others, show that Chinese officials decidedly to make the law less severe even after it was shown to the outside world.
Chinese officials have done their best to portray this as a “peace” bill rather than a “war” bill. Premier Wen Jiabao commented that this law was solely directed at “splittists” in Taiwan, and that in the eventuality of war China would do its best to protect the people of Taiwan. He said that the real danger to stability in the Taiwan strait is supporters of independence for Taiwan. Wen also mentioned in uncharacteristically belligerent terms that China did not fear outside interference in the Taiwan question, and said that Japan and America must not violate Chinese sovereignty. Other officials have gone so far as to say that this law indicates no change in Chinese policy toward Taiwan.
As mentioned above, China softened the anti-secession law before passing it, and many analysts attribute this to the extremely negative reaction to the bill in Taiwan. 93% of Taiwanese reject the use of force to solve cross-strait difficulties, 84% say Taiwan is not an inalienable part of China, and 71% say outside involvement is warranted with regards to reaching a final status agreement.
Taiwanese officials have said that the passing of the anti-secession law will require a total reevaluation of cross-strait policies. They criticized the bill by saying that it gives a blank-check to the military and is intended as a threat. Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian commented that “"If they ignore the strong opposition of the international community and go ahead with the legislation, it risks raising tensions and setting off the crisis of a full-phase backtracking of relations." More charter flights during the Tomb Sweeping Holiday seem unlikely, and Taiwanese restrictions on investment in the mainland will not be lifted, and may even be strengthened. The potentially most destabilizing reaction the Taiwanese could make to the anti-secession law would be to have a “defensive” referendum on Taiwanese identity, or possibly reform the constitution. The ruling party has said they will not pursue this course, but will not block such a movement, saying that it would be entirely China’s fault for originally unilaterally changing the status quo. President Chen is calling for a million people to march on March 26 to protest the law and keep international attention on Taiwan’s isolation. Many analysts believe that Chen sees this as a political tool to reclaim leadership of the independence camp after recently softening his policies and disappointing radicals. Chen also believes that the anti-secession law is an opportunity to show the world that Taiwan is not the problem because of unilateral steps toward independence, but rather that China is the “bad guy.” If he decides to take this route, it will end a warming in relations over the last few months. Some Chinese analysts have already described the anti-secession law as a mistake, as it was originally intended to threaten “splittists,” but those “splittists” had made conciliatory remarks in the last several weeks and can now describe China as ill-intentioned. Some analysts believe that relations will swiftly get back on track, describing the anti-secession bill as the “hard” part of Chinese President Hu Jintao’s “hard and soft” approach, meaning being strict with regards to Taiwanese independence but proactive in terms of cultivating Taiwanese trust and positive impression of the mainland.
The rest of the world has had a mixed reaction to the law. The US State Department has described the bill as "not helpful in the current environment, where there are opportunities for exchanges that could move forward a peaceful resolution of outstanding cross-Strait differences." Secretary of State Condolleeza Rice and White House Spokesman Scott McClellan have also expressed disappointment in the law. Russia and Pakistan support the law, while Europe has had a mixed reaction. The European Union is opposed to the use of force to solve the Taiwan question, and therefore many say that the EU, in protest of this law, should not cancel its weapons sales restrictions on the PRC. However, most analysts believe that despite a possible delay the sanctions will still be lifted. Australian officials have said that in the eventuality of war in the Taiwan Straits, Australia may activate its ANZUS alliance with the United States and provide direct or indirect support to US forces.
Who likes pirates? I do!
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, Wednesday 2 2005
A. Japan and US See Peace in Taiwan Straits as Strategic Objective
B. Possibility of Regular Flights?
C. Taiwanese President Does Not Rule out Reunification; Major Political Repercussions
-Japan and US See Peace in Taiwan Straits as Strategic Objective
For the first time, Japan has stated that a peaceful resolution to the crisis in the Taiwan Straits is a strategic objective that it shares with the United States. This is a significant change in past policy, as Japan normally avoids the topic in order not to displease the Chinese government. However, a number of recent developments have caused the Japanese government to see China as more of a threat and to take a harder line, and Japanese actions as well have angered Chinese officials.
Both sides have recently taken maneuvers seen by the other side as provocative. A Han-class Chinese submarine entered Japanese territorial waters and was chased by Japan’s Self-Defense Forces for two days. Several analysts have claimed that this action may have been a test of Japan’s resolve should China invade Taiwan. Japan recently occupied a lighthouse built by nationalists in the 1970s on a small island in strategically and economically valuable area to which both countries lay claim. Li Teng-Hui, a former Taiwanese president, was granted a Japanese visa. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi still visits Yasukuni Shrine, a cemetery with several war-criminals from World War II. Both sides lay claim to the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu in Chinese), an issue that for a long time was dormant but has flared up again due to other factors. Competition for resources has also been a source of contention, as both sides tried to persuade Russia to build a pipeline that favored their interests, with Japan winning the deal in the end. Japan’s Defense Ministry also recently released a report that saw China’s military as a threat in the near-term, confirming Chinese suspicions.
The influence of these developments, among others, have pushed Japan and the US closer strategically, causing the US Secretaries of Defense and State, as well as their Japanese counterparts, to declare after their recent “2+2 meeting in Washington that Taiwan should be defended in the wake of an unprovoked Chinese attack. The Taiwanese representative in Japan commented that, “This is the first time that Japan has made its stance clear; in the past Japan has been very indirect on the Taiwan issue.”
Because of Japan’s Constitution, it would be unable to take direct military action to resist any Chinese invasion of Taiwan. But this declaration seems to imply that in the event of war Japan would agree to support US forces with logistical support, like transportation, as well as conduct medical rescue missions behind the lines.
-Possibility of Regular Flights?
On February 16, Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian called for talks on direct cargo flights between Taiwan and the mainland. He said at a dinner held for Taiwanese businessmen working in China that, “I hope to re-open the door for negotiators and to promote plans to make cargo shipments using the Lunar New Year charter flights as a basis.” Chinese newspaper editorials, frequently used to convey the feelings of senior government officials, have also recently called for regular direct flights, both for cargo shipments and individual travellers. China called for the Taiwanese authorities not to pursue such agreements because of “narrow-minded political calculations,” and to accept the “Hong Kong” basis for new talks. This refers to a previous agreement that each side would adhere to the “One China” policy but reserve the right to interpret that concept in its own way.
Despite the recent warming of cross-strait relations and the stated desire of both sides to pursue more direct flights, it is not clear whether or not it will be possible to accomplish. Chen has refused to accept the “One China” policy on any condition, and due to Taiwanese security concerns it may be difficult to allow for so many planes of unclear origins to fly daily across the Taiwan Straits. The Taiwanese Mainland Affairs Council also says that only Taiwanese authorized by the government would be allowed to negotiate with the mainland.
If direct cargo flights were allowed, it would increase cross-strait economic ties to a new level. Many Chinese officials feel that increased economic ties would decrease hopes for Taiwanese independence, and show good will toward Taiwan. It would also signify that should Taiwan pursue independence, the economic repercussions, let alone military confrontation, would be unacceptable.
-Taiwanese President Does Not Rule out Reunification
Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian recently met with James Soong of the opposition People First Party. Their joint statement after the meeting, in which Chen agreed not to pursue independence and did not rule out eventual reunification with China, has sent shockwaves throughout the political world. Another important result of the meeting was that it has shown the degree to which American officials are directly involved with Taiwanese politics.
In the joint statement, Chen said that he would, “not rule out the possibility of any model of relationship evolving on the basis of goodwill.” He also said that he would not pursue independence, would not change the name of the “Republic of China”(Taiwan), nor would he put these issues to referendum for the rest of his term, which ends in 2008. These commitments go much farther than Chen has ever promised before. The meeting comes after several years of hostility between the ruling and opposition parties, of which James Soong’s People First Party is one. The PFP is heavily pro-China. After the recent legislative elections in which opposition parties retained their majority, Chen was forced to try to cooperate with the opposition in order to accomplish any of his objectives. However, Chen’s Democratic Progressive Party, is heavily pro-independence, and many of the party faithful felt that Chen sold them out after this meeting. In fact, the DPP’s more radical “pan-green” ally, the Taiwan Solidarity Union, has threatened to stop cooperating with the DPP. At the same time, the Nationalist Party, the PFP’s nominal ally, felt left out of the meeting, and are wary of PFP-DPP cooperation not in the interest of the Nationalist Party. Soong claims that the whole meeting was masterminded by the United States government. He asked reporters at a news conference, “Do you think President Chen will talk to me without the Americans?” He also said that American officials used swear words to refer to President Chen, and that they told him, “the cross-strait situation was far more serious than the Taiwanese authorities assumed.” Some analysts say that claims of American involvement have some credibility, as the US does not want any trouble in East Asia while it is distracted in the Middle East, and that by giving Soong a high profile he might not as ardently oppose an $18 billion weapons purchase. In any case, although cross-aisle relations might not be as unfriendly as before, trouble within the two camps themselves has gotten worse.
I'm Spartacus!
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, February 2 2005
A. Significant Shift in Chinese Policy Towards Taiwan
B. Important Mainland Officials Visit Taiwan
-Significant Shift in Chinese Policy Towards Taiwan
In the last several weeks analysts have identified a new pattern emerging in Beijing’s Taiwan policy, and a recent speech commemorating former leader Jiang Zemin’s “8 Points” on the issue have confirmed that Hu Jintao’s government has begun to pursue a slightly different technique to deal with the island. Simply put, China has begun to use a carrot and stick method, in part by simultaneously threatening Taiwan with a new anti-secession law, occasionally mentioning the possibility of war, and not allowing Taiwanese businessmen who support independent activists to do business in China, while at the same time calling for direct cross-strait flights, more unofficial agreements regarding trade, travel, and mail, and sending high level officials to visit Taiwan in commemoration of a deceased, respected negotiator. (See below).
Chang Wu-Ueh of Tamkang University Institute recently commented that, “If China wants to be soft, it will be softer than before. If China wants to be hard, it will be harder than before.” China is in essence trying to give the Taiwanese a choice between absolute war and a reunification process that falls within Taiwan’s interests.
One Chinese official commented that China was open to negotiation with any Taiwanese politician, “regardless of his past rhetoric and actions.” This goes farther than previous statements, which blamed specific politicians for the increase in tensions. This statement seems to imply that even the Taiwanese President, Chen Shui-bian, is also included. Yet any politician who wants dialogue with the mainland still must accept the one-China principle, and that has been the dealkiller up to this point in time. In any case, analysts say that these changes can partly be attributed to Hu’s desire to put his own stamp on Taiwan policy, and partly attributed to the feeling that after pro-independence parties failed to capture the legislature in Taiwan a more conciliatory approach would damage Chen’s support for independence policies.
Two issues that define this new policy are the cross-strait flights and anti-secession law. Up to this point, the cross strait flights have been a success, and Chinese Major General Wang Zaixi has said that these flights, “provide a good model and create good conditions” for establishing direct trade, transport and mail. It is a new page in cross-strait relations and a real success. Yet at the same time Chinese government and party officials are considering passing an anti-secession law that would oblige the Chinese government to use military force to ensure that Taiwan does not attempt to formally separate itself from the mainland. Taiwan has condemned the action as a unilateral change to the status quo, but it seems China will pass (rubber-stamp) the law in the near future. Some see it as a Chinese version of the Taiwan Relations Act. When seen together, it becomes clear that the PRC is trying to make the choice for Taiwan clearer; certain war and defeat or significant economic benefits.
-Important Mainland Officials Visit Taiwan
The highest level visit by Chinese officials to Taiwan in ten years recently occurred when Sun Yafun, Vice President of the mainland’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait, as well as its Secretary General Li Yafei, visited Taiwan to commemorate the decease of a prominent Taiwanese diplomat. Although the two will not hold any talks or meet officials, comments they made and the timing of their visit are significant, causing many to describe the visit as a culmination in a relaxation of tension in the Taiwan Strait.
Sun stated that, “I haven’t visited Taiwan for nearly eleven years and I really want to visit there again so I can better understand the people who live there.” The two Chinese officials also said they hoped that more substantive discussions could take place soon, and even bowed to the picture of the Taiwanese diplomat, Koo Chen-fu, for whom they came to Taiwan to commemorate.
Moreover, this visit comes in the wake of several significant events. A new Taiwanese Prime Minister, Frank Hsieh, has called for cooperation with China and a lessening of tensions. A few days before, the historical cross-strait flights began. And finally, the Chinese side in a ceremony celebrating Jiang Zemin’s first declaration of his “8 Points” regarding Taiwan said that the PRC was willing to negotiate with any Taiwanese despite his past. Moreover, the high level of these officials is significant as well. While it is not clear where the next steps might be taken to increase cooperation, the atmosphere now is better than it has been for several years.
Interesting Article on Taiwan in National Review
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/blumenthal200501270741.asp
Joseph Torigian
Jptori@umich.edu
It's back!
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, January 19 2005
A. Talks Between Taiwan and the United States
B. Historical Charter Flights
C. Truth Commission Calls for Taiwanese President to be Recalled
-Talks Between Taiwan and the United States
Officials in the United States State Department and the Pentagon have recently met with important Taiwanese leaders to discuss developments in the Taiwan Straits. Chairman of the opposition People First Party James Soong sat down with top Washington officials while he was on vacation following the failure of his party in the recent legislative elections. While the talks were confidential and unofficial, related officials have indicated that Soong was pressured to cease his opposition to Taiwan’s purchase of an expensive American weapons package and to push for compromise with the ruling party. Soong was also urged to work towards dialogue between China and Taiwan. Soong is one of the most important politicians in Taiwan, and the fact that high-level officials met with him is significant because it shows that the US has not ceased contact with all high-profile Taiwanese officials, albeit these contacts continue in a private capacity.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Assistant National Security Director Stephen Hadley also took time to brief Taiwanese officials on a recent meeting with the mainland Chinese Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office, Chen Yunlin. Chen’s goal was to persuade the United States not to resist a new state law being considered by the Communist Party. Although it is clear that this “anti-secessionist law” would somehow legally force the Chinese government to use force to solve the Taiwanese question should Taiwan pursue independence (a counter to the Taiwan Relations Act) its exact contents have not been divulged. Although Armitage and Hadley expressed concern that such a law would only escalate cross-strait tensions, it seems clear that the US will not comment directly on the law until its contents are revealed, most likely when it is passed by the National People’s Congress, a rubber-stamp committee. The US officials discussed these talks with two Taiwanese leaders in Washington, and also told the two politicians that 2005-2006 were critical years in cross-strait relations. Taiwan should engage in quiet-diplomacy with the mainland, but the US would not mediate.
-Historical Charter Flights
For the first time in half of a century, Taiwanese and Chinese passenger planes carrying businessmen will fly across the Taiwan strait without first stopping at Hong Kong or Macao during the Chinese New Year. However, planes will still have to first pass through Hong Kong or Macao’s air space. One million Taiwanese executives work in the mainland, and their demands for a chance to return home to visit their family during the holidays have turned into political pressure that resulted in these flights.
The Taiwanese Mainland Affairs Council Chairman Joseph Wu has suggested turning these flights into a tradition, and even possibly expanding the charter flights to other common holidays. However, China has yet to react to this announcement, and future charter flights will depend on the success of the ones currently planned.
Taiwan did not allow cross-strait flights for five decades because of security concerns, and those concerns still linger. When asked why Songshan Airport in Taiwan and Chingchuankang Airport in Taichung were not opened to Chinese flights, security issues were cited. However, even these considerations are slowly disappearing. Ministry of Joint Strategy Section Chief Lee Chieh-chiu commented that the slow speed of airliners would give the Taiwanese military time to react to a danger, and that those flights would be easily identifiable. Furthermore, Lee said that a “Trojan Plane” of invading Chinese commandos would have no chance of success.
The implications of this agreement are still unclear. The agreement happens in the midst of a buildup of tension in the straits caused by Chinese threats of the use of force and Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian’s steps to more concretely separate Taiwan from the mainland. One implication is that Chen will be able to claim that agreements can take place between Taiwan and China without Taiwan first accepting the “one China principle,” which China has demanded as a condition for talks. It is a step in the right direction, but so far it has had no concrete impact on other issues of cross-strait concern.
-Truth Commission Calls for Taiwanese President to be Recalled
The Truth Investigation Committee, created by opposition parties in the legislature following the disputed presidential election last March, has released a report saying that the assassination attempt on the day of the election was a political farce. Wang Ching-feng, a spokesperson for the commission, said that, “The motive behind the March 19 Shooting is to manipulate the election.” The Committee sent a 150-page report to the legislature suggesting that Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian be removed from office for refusing to cooperate with the investigation and because of the faked assassination attempt.
The government countered by noting that the highest court in Taiwan found the Committee to be unconstitutional because of the broad powers enumerated it by the opposition-led legislature. Therefore, most involved agencies refused to provide the Committee with information regarding the incident. “This indicates that the commission arrived at its assumption without the support of any concrete documents or evidence. Its report is outrageous and completely unacceptable, Chen Wen-chung, a presidential spokesperson, said.
The opposition parties have greeted the announcement with a lukewarm reception. Although they agree with its findings, neither opposition party feels that public opinion would allow them to recall the president. Moreover, parties on both sides of the aisle have recently been trying to work together. Therefore, it does not seem that this finding will have a significant impact on the current political situation.
Taiwanese Election
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, December 15 2004
Special Report on Taiwanese Election: Defying Expectations of Analysts, Opposition Parties in Favor of Closer Ties with Beijing Maintain Majority in Legislature
A: The Numbers
B. Interpretation
C. Repercussions: Domestic and International
The Numbers: (225 Seats Total)
Pan-green (Political parties loyal to President Chen Shui-bian, including Democratic Progressive Party and Taiwan Solidarity Union):
101 seats
Pan-blue (Opposition parties, including Kuomintang and People First Party):
114
Others (Non-partisan Solidarity Union and Independents:
10
Interpretation:
On December 11 the Taiwanese went to the polls to vote for the National Legislature. Most analysts have described the results as an upset by the opposition pan-blue, consisting of the Kuomintang (KMT and People First Party (PFP), over the pan-green parties, made up of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU). However, it should be noted that although most Western news sources have described this as a big victory for the opposition, and the KMT may very well may derive momentum from its victory, the Legislature now looks exactly like it did before the election, with the pan-blues picking up only a single seat.
The interpretation of the results as an “upset” stems from the fact that most polls indicated that the pan-greens would win a majority. The more concrete difference is that the make-up of the pan-blue and pan-green representation has drastically changed, with the larger KMT and DPP parties taking seats from their smaller coalition partners. This has already caused some fighting within the two camps, with the PFP blaming its poor showing on the KMT’s refusal to cooperate in the election. Yet the fact that the KMT and DPP did better at the expense of their smaller and more radical allies shows that Taiwanese are more interested in preserving the status quo with China than rocking the boat.
Also, although the pan-blues have a significantly larger share of seats than the pan-greens, the vote-share between the two camps was almost the same (see below for reason), which means that the political leanings of Taiwanese have not significantly changed. The largest change between the presidential election in March and this latest election for the legislature is that the turnout was much lower than usual, showing that many Taiwanese are becoming turned off by political feuding.
As mentioned above, most analysts thought that the pan-blues would pick up a large number of seats, in part because the opposition was in disarray. The KMT and PFP failed to combine before the election. The KMT continues to be tainted by accusations of dirty money obtained when it instituted one party rule. Most importantly, Lien Chan and James Soong, chairmen of the KMT and PFP and presidential and vice presidential candidates in the March election, refused to recognize the results of that election. They created chaos in Taipei, including some violence, by calling for massive protests. Many Taiwanese were incensed by this. Yet the pan-blues still succeeded. Why? The results of the election can be explained primarily by two factors: serious flaws in election strategy by the pan-greens, and discomfort with President Chen Shui-bian’s election-eve pandering to supporters of Taiwanese independence.
The pan-greens, expecting a huge amount of support, were simply over-confident. In Taiwan’s political system, every county sends a number of representatives to the legislature, and they are selected by whoever wins the most votes. Therefore, candidates not only compete with other parties, they also fight with other members of their own party for the same group of votes. The DPP nominated too many candidates, spreading the vote too thin. Also, confident voters voted for weaker candidates hoping they would succeed, while stronger candidates failed as well. Many strong DPP candidates were unable to run because they are serving in the administration.
Chen in the runup to the election was desperate to win a majority so that he could push through his constitutional amendments (or new constitution) and place Taiwan closer to formal independence during the last years of his second term. He was also nervous about his smaller coalition partner, the TSU, gaining votes by appealing to a sense of Taiwanese nationalism and identity. He therefore based his campaign on identity politics, calling for fundamental changes to the constitution, deciding to use “Taiwan” to apply to the UN, and changing “China” to “Taiwan” at overseas departments and state-industries, insulting the intelligence of most observers by claiming that this name-change was intended to cut down on confusion. When the US commented that it was not in favor of this last move, many Taiwanese thought Chen might be going to far. One analyst of the election said that the US essentially defeated Chen. Finally, the Taiwanese president neglected to face bread-and-butter issues, allowing the KMT to use its patron-client relationships to bring out the local vote. Chen ran a national campaign and lost the local elections.
China may have also influenced the vote. In the weeks before the election, the PRC made comments intended to make clear that it would not accept Taiwanese independence and military force might become the only option. It did not, however, tie these comments directly to the election and was mostly quiet in the few days before voting. In the past, Chinese threats have increased the vote for pro-Taiwanese independence parties. Taiwanese may have decided that slowing down on the road to independence was a safe bet, especially after rebukes from the US.
Repercussions: Domestic and International
On the domestic front, it seems that Chen has decided that the best way forward is to cooperate with the opposition, which is a good sign for a country that has been beset by standoff and gridlock over the last four years. He says that he will become a president for all of Taiwan, not just that of his party. He says that he humbly respects the vote results, and that the “DPP is willing to take the first steps toward reconciliaton.” When announcing his resignation from the post of DPP chairman, his voice was choked with sobs. He said the DPP would adjust its pace and make readjustments after this loss. It is clear that he fully expected to win, and is personally reeling from the surprise results.
Relations with the United States will probably not change dramatically. However, the victorious pan-blue oppose the purchase of American weapons, which Washington says is essential if Taiwan wants to prove to the US it is serious about its own defense. It will be much more difficult politically for the US to protect Taiwan if the weapons purchase is not successfully concluded.
Most analysts also do not believe that the results will have any serious immediate affect on cross-strait relations. Although the pan-blue support closer ties to China and have criticized Chen for risking war by provoking the mainland, that does not necessarily cross-strait talks are in the making. Indeed, China may feel that Chen and the Taiwanese-Independence camp is losing momentum and that refusal to negotiate may make them even more politically isolated. In the long term, however, the pan-blues will be in a position to block Chen’s attempts to change the constitution, or take other steps that would bring Taiwan closer to de jure independence and simultaneously anger China.
I am a graduate of Starfleet Academy; I know many things.
Again, the Word file with my report has hyperlinks to a bunch of sites. If you want the exact sites because you're interested, please let me know.
Taiwanese News
Summary and Analysis, December 1 2004
A. Taiwanese President Calls for Referendum on Constitution, US Expresses Anxiety
B. Taiwan Excluded from ASEAN
C. Taiwan’s Credit Rating Threatened By Cross-Strait Tensions
-Taiwanese President Calls for Referendum on Constitution, US Expresses Anxiety
Recent comments by Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian about a referendum on a “new Taiwan Constitution” has led the United States to ask for Chen to explain his comments, which in essence can be interpreted as a mild rebuke and warning. Chen has called for the termination of Taiwan’s current “Chinese constitution,” likening it to “a child wearing an adult’s clothes.” He plans for a referendum on a Taiwanese constitution in 2006, and its implementation on May 20, 2008, the day of the inauguration of Taiwan’s next president. He said that it was imperative for his “pan-green” supporters to win a majority in the Legislature in December 11 elections for his plans to be able to succeed.
Chen has been ambiguous about the nature of the changes. Although he says that the new constitution would be created specifically to meet the island’s needs, he defers on the question of whether or not it would be an entirely new constitution, or merely consist of amendments to the one currently in place that was brought to Taiwan by the Nationalists. Chen says of the issue, “The most important thing is to actually kick off the constitutional reform program, not a battle of words over ‘constitution-making’ and ‘constitution-revising.’”
In Taiwan this subtle terminology reverberates far behind domestic politics. Most analysts see Chen’s objective is to separate Taiwan from the mainland in a more concrete way by fundamentally changing its mainland-origin constitution. Although Taiwan has changed the constitution a number of times in the past, the scope of the Taiwanese government’s current plans is clearly far more expansive. China’s former foreign minister Tang Jiaxun has weighed in on the subject, saying that Chen was trying to create an “atmosphere of propaganda.” Tang also accused Chen of exploiting China’s hosting of the 2008 Olympics by provoking China with a constitutional referendum at a time when China was preoccupied. Communist-controlled news agencies have also said that China would go to war to prevent Chen from making a new constitution.
State Department Spokesperson Richard Boucher has called on Chen to reassert his support of the “four nos,” those being not declaring independence, not changing the country’s name, (officially “the Republic of China,”) not including a clause regarding Taiwanese existence as an independent sovereign state in the constitution, and not holding a referendum on changing the status quo. Boucher stressed that, “We are opposed to any referendum that would change Taiwan’s status or move toward independence.” Chen has stated that he continues to adhere to the aforementioned “four no’s.” Yet despite Chen’s repeated statements of commitment, he has already decided to apply to the United Nations using the name Taiwan, not Republic of China. Also, it seems that his plans for a “Taiwanese Constitution” could be seen as a violation of his previous promises. It is uncertain how seriously his statements should be taken because of the December election, but it seems clear that the problem of Taiwan’s constitution should be the biggest problem, and potentially most destabilizing factor, in East Asia for the next few years
-Taiwan Excluded from ASEAN
The Taiwanese Minister of Foreign Affairs has claimed that China’s agreement to form a free trade area with the ASEAN nations is a deliberate effort to isolate Taiwan. According to MOFA, this trade agreement is a deliberate attempt by the mainland to economically isolate Taiwan from the rest of Southeast Asia.
-Taiwan’s Credit Rating Threatened by Cross-Strait Tensions
Standard and Poor’s has cut Taiwan’s economic outlook from stable to negative because of fears that cross-strait tensions will spiral out of control. Alan Tseng, a vice president at Capital Securities, commented, “The S&P downgrade was definitely a piece of bad news, especially to overseas investors, because it came from what's seen as an objective outsider voicing concerns over cross-strait tensions.” In conjunction with China’s deliberate attempts to economically isolate Taiwan, Taiwanese economic and political independence could likely become less feasible.
-For an excellent article on the possibilities and repercussions of the upcoming Taiwanese elections in Asia Times, please go to http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FL01Ad03.html.
Joseph Torigian
jptori@umich.edu
