Despite a major political realignment in 2014 — which saw the KMT suffer its worse electoral results in the ‘nine-in-one local elections’, and mass demonstrations rejecting closer ties to China — the KMT did little to adjust. In 2015, a majority of Taiwanese people continued to reject policies that were viewed as coercing Taiwan’s political and national identity to suit the Chinese Communist Party.
In July, echoing the concerns of the March 2014 Sunflower Movement, hundreds of students and their supporters staged a week-long sit-in in the education ministry. The protestors demanded the resignation of the minister and the reversal of government-backed revisions to the country’s school curriculum and textbooks. These changes included altering the phrase ‘Japanese rule’ to ‘Japanese colonial rule’, and referring to Chiang Kai-shek’s military dictatorship as a ‘glorious retrocession’. The protesters claimed that the changes were designed to indoctrinate young Taiwanese to support unification with China, degrade the influence of Japan in Taiwan’s modernisation and purposely ignore the brutality of Chiang’s regime.
But despite continuing backlash, the KMT chose a conservative pro-China presidential candidate, Hung Hsiu-chu. She remarked that the KMT principle of ‘one China, different interpretations’ should be revised to ‘one China, same interpretation’. She controversially advocated for the need to reach a peace accord with China — that is, unification as opposed to maintaining the status quo. Hung also compared Taiwanese activists to members of Mao Zedong’s Red Guards.
Inevitably, polling for the KMT and Hung plummeted to a 15.5 per cent approval rating — even below that of a minor party candidate, the People First Party’s James Soong. After calls for her to quit the presidential race, including from within her own party, Hung was finally replaced in October with the more moderate Eric Chu.
On the back of the mistakes of Ma’s administration, the Tsai Ingwen-led DPP has made major inroads. In her failed 2012 presidential bid, Tsai was criticised for her cross-Strait policy due to fears it would alienate both the mainland and the United States. In response, Tsai adopted a pragmatic attitude towards keeping the current pace of China–Taiwan relations — a far cry from the former DPP President Chen Shui-bian’s vocal calls for de jure independence. Tsai’s campaign success is arguably mostly due to the KMT’s failings. The KMT has fatally linked Taiwan’s future too closely to that of China’s and failed to consider the Taiwanese people’s desire and right for self-determination.
Answering to previous criticism that she was part of the political elite and had little understanding of the concerns of ordinary citizens and minorities, Tsai has also outlined significant social and judicial reforms. These policies address key issues such as inter-generational disparity, the lack of government transparency, constitutional changes to the legislature and judicial system, reconciliation with Taiwan’s indigenous population and lessening the ideological divide between the Pan-Blue and Pan-Green political coalitions. Interestingly, her running mate, Chen Chien-jen, is a Catholic — one of less than 5 per cent of Taiwanese who identify as Christian.
However, such reforms are easier said than done. The January 2016 battle for control of the legislature will determine whether Tsai’s reforms can be brought to fruition. And any presidential hopeful would have to face the more long-term problem of how to inject new energy into Taiwan’s stagnated economy.
Taiwan’s annual GDP growth for 2015–2019 is predicted to be just 2 per cent. Both the KMT and DPP are aware of the challenges of weakening external demands for Taiwan’s exports and Taiwan’s struggling domestic market. Although Taiwan’s export-driven market would benefit from cuts in tariffs in the Chinese market, what it needs most is an end to its political isolation. Taiwan is currently unable to sign other bilateral agreements or participate in international organisations without offending China.
In November, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with President Ma in Singapore in the first-ever meeting between the leaders of the two countries. While this meeting was significant in signalling a new Chinese approach to managing cross-Strait relations, two key dynamics remain entrenched that will continue to hamper changes to the cross-Strait status quo.
First, Taiwan’s socio-political trends indicate that more and more people identify as solely Taiwanese. Any administration now faces a growing civil society and youth movement who will bring with them a very different attitude to cross-Strait relations. It will be increasingly difficult for any Taiwanese leader to balance the growing desire of most Taiwanese to become independent with maintaining the cross-Strait status quo.
Second, the United States remains committed to its (informal) security guarantee of Taiwan. There are reports that a new US$1 billion arms deal is currently being prepared. The geostrategic location of Taiwan is as significant to China as it is to the United States. For ideological reasons, any US government would face enormous pressure to defend democratic Taiwan against a revisionist, authoritarian China — not doing so would be a political nightmare.
Regardless the outcome of the election, how Taiwan manages these ongoing challenges will determine the country’s prospects in 2016 and beyond.
Sheryn Lee is an Associate Lecturer in Security Studies at the Department of Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism, Macquarie University.
It is a very difficult issue to manage the relationship between China and Taiwan. However, the Paris agreement on climate change out of COP21 shows that difficult challenges can be tackled with creative thinking and approaches.
Given the historical and current realities, some kind of federation with high autonomy may be possible to satisfy both sides.
To state that “In November, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with President Ma in Singapore in the first-ever meeting between the leaders of the two countries.” defies reality because that implies that Taiwan is already an independent country, which it is not.
I recall that the author and Benjamin Schreer wrote previously that “the Xi–Ma meeting was a watershed for China in its recognition of a new era in managing cross-Strait relations.” (The Xi–Ma meeting signals a new era in China–Taiwan relations, 13 Nov 2015).
That was inspirational and full of promise.
Now a month later the author’s view has changed ominously to “While this meeting was significant in signalling a new Chinese approach to managing cross-Strait relations, two key dynamics remain entrenched that will continue to hamper changes to the cross-Strait status quo. First, Taiwan’s socio-political trends indicate that more and more people identify as solely Taiwanese. Second, the United States remains committed to its (informal) security guarantee of Taiwan.”
But this contradicts the author’s previous stance that “If elected, she (DPP candidate) is unlikely to revert to the same pro-independence rhetoric of the 2000–2008.”
The paradox is this: If that is the sanguine scenario why is there a need for Uncle Sam to defend Taiwan? Why waste taxpayers’ money for a “new US$1 billion arms deal” to benefit only the US military industrial complex?
Why not use the money to develop new cutting-edge technologies in Taiwan because as the maxim goes ‘knowledge creates wealth’?
For 60 plus years the implied ‘One Country, Two Systems’ solution worked. Why the need to rock the boat now? Taiwan can keep its Democracy like Greece and the Philippines while China sticks to Meritocracy, which has turned China from a basket-case in 1978 to be the biggest trading nation in the world today and the 2nd largest economy in 37 years.
China has launched the 57-member AIIB and will launch the multi-Billion dollar ‘One Belt and One Road’ mega projects.
The One-Belt ‘Old Silk Road’ will link Chongqing, Xian, Kazakhstan, Central Asia, Russia, Poland, Belarus and Germany, by a double high-speed railway system, creating a new Renaissance in Eurasia and untold wealth.
The ‘One Road’ Maritime Silk Road will link China to the 10 Asean nations, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Oman, Iran, Africa, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Greece, Turkey and the EU, creating seaborne trade of major proportions and generating great opportunities and fortunes in the participating nations.
Xi told Ma in Singapore, 7 Nov, that “China and Taiwan are brothers. The bones may be broken but we are united by flesh.”
Taiwan, therefore, has a pole position to participate in the ‘One Belt and One Road’ mega projects to jump-start its moribund economy.
If the new Taiwanese President challenges conventional wisdom and foolishly rejects the ‘Detente’ created by the recent Xi-Ma meeting, Taiwan may end up squeezed between an economic rock and a hard place.
The reason is simple, most Taiwanese has seen how One Countries Two Systems has played out in Hong Kong, and definitely have no desire to be a SAR given the state of Tibet and the Uyghurs.
We’re not stupid…
<<<Inevitably, polling for the KMT and Hung plummeted to a 15.5 per cent approval rating — even below that of a minor party candidate, the People First Party’s James Soong. After calls for her to quit the presidential race, including from within her own party, Hung was finally replaced in October with the more moderate Eric Chu.<>>
Actually, Chu has the same policies she does. He’s Ma 2.0, and is polling just slightly above Hung.
<<<>>
There’s nothing interesting about it. The current president, Ma Ying-jeou, is also a Catholic, and three of the four previous ones were Protestants. Lee Teng-hui used to give sermons in churches around the nation every week until he became too busy in his political career.
>>>>>
Tsai’s campaign success is arguably mostly due to the KMT’s failings. The KMT has fatally linked Taiwan’s future too closely to that of China’s and failed to consider the Taiwanese people’s desire and right for self-determination.
Thanks for saying this. So few writers are willing to forthrightly declare how awful the KMT has become.
Michael
Yes, we will definitely see the Taiwan independence party’s chutzpah tomorrow night. Tsai Ing-wen will no longer need to hide her real agenda, which she has been hiding all along during the campaign.
On the other hand, China will be forced to take immediate pre-emptive economic measures to remind Taiwanese of reality. No military action will be necessary.
China: “Sure, you can vote for whomever you want, and we can do whatever we want.”
Whining to Uncle Sam is not going to work this time. Neither will expanding trade with Japan, South Asia and Southeast Asia, as these countries already have their own economic problems – nothing to expand. Japan has been in an economic recession for 2 decades.
For all his gutlessness in local politics, Ma at least was able to establish a more peaceful situation.