The likely makeup of next year’s presidential election in Taiwan is clearer today after the main opposition Democratic Progressive Party said that chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen had secured the party’s nomination after winning a telephone poll. AP reports that the party is expected to formally announce Tsai's nomination as the DPP candidate to take on President Ma Ying-jeou next January on May 4.
I asked J. Michael Cole, deputy news chief at the Taipei Times and a correspondent for Jane's Intelligence Review, for his take on the result and also on Tsai as a candidate.
Cole noted that her victory in the island-wide poll against her two opponents—Su Tseng-chang and Hsu Hsin-liang—is an interesting development because if confirmed she’d be the first-ever female candidate for the post.
‘Her victory over Su was pretty narrow, while Hsu was from the beginning of the primaries far, far behind and few saw him as a strong contended in what was pretty much a two-way race,’ Cole told me. ‘Polls showed the average for Tsai against Ma was 42.5 percent against 35.04 percent, while Su’s was 41.15 percent against 33.79 percent.’
So, what can we expect from her? ‘Despite her role in the late 1990s as a member of small group that developed then-President Lee Teng-hui’s “Two State Theory”—a legacy passed on by Lee to the incoming DPP administration of Chen Shui-bian—Tsai is regarded as a moderate, in that she has supported engaging China economically and in other fields,’ Cole said.
‘Her “middle-of-the-road” approach to China — engage, but with caution and with clearly defined red lines when it comes to Taiwan’s sovereignty — should have appeal with centrist, undecided, and “light blue” KMT voters. Within the pan-green camp, her willingness to adopt a more “pragmatic” policy of engagement China could lose her votes and support with the “deep greens,” but at the end of the day their relatively small number shouldn’t have too much of an impact.’
And where does she stand on the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty? Cole told me that Tsai’s adherence to the DPP charter, which clearly emphasizes Taiwan’s sovereignty, and the perception that she won’t yield on that fundamental aspect of her platform, should be sufficient to allay fears as she makes her case for engaging China that she would “sell out” Taiwan in the process, ‘something that has haunted Ma and the KMT.’
He added: ‘She has relatively little experience running for office, with her bid for New Taipei City mayor in late November last year representing the first time she did so. While some would say she comes across as “bookish,” she has undeniable charm and is Western educated, with good English skills. She’s of Hakka descent and also speaks Taiwanese (also known as Hoklo) fairly well, meaning that she can tap into those resources for support.’
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
kc
Tsai stands with the people of Taiwan and the dignity of Formosa. We all support her and for freedom, liberty, independence, prosperity! The DPP was never anti-China! It just doesnt believe Taiwan and China should be under one sovereignty. It also wants peace with China as country to country. The KMT on the other hand is an appeaser to China–THAT is the difference! DPP is not anti-china. Remember, China is the belligerent party here!
Frank
Hi kc:
If Tsai is running for the president of Repulic of China, how can she is anti-RO China?
I understand that not all Taiwanese are Chinese. Many of the Taiwanese are mix blood people between a Japanese solder and Taiwanese comfort woman. Many of those hybrids have Japanese names. They might have a non-functioning Taiwanese father by name only and fake Chinese names.
However, don’t you have to be a Chinese or pro-Chinese running for president of a Chinese nation?(Republic of China)
How can Repulic of China be hijack by non-Chinese?
John Chan
Japanese adopted British colonization policy in Taiwan, policy of elite, a very small number of Taiwanese can get in a very limited number of spots in the universities after fierce competition. Only the graduates from the local universities can be bureaucrats under the lordship of Japanese. Those graduates became the elite of the Taiwan society just like those graduates from Hong Kong University became the ruling elite in HK. Both of them are fierce loyal lackeys to their colonial masters, HK elites are loyal to the British, who fought fanatically along side with the British to against the retuning of HK to China, they even told China that PLA could not be stationed in HK after 1997.
So are those Taiwanese elites who are extremely loyal to Japan. Most members of DPP and anti-China hardcore members in Taiwan are those Japan’s Taiwanese elites and their related members, they are the Japanese wannabe, Lee Teng-Hui is a typical example.
John Chan
The time for Taiwan remaining in this awkward status is numbered. All DPP big shots do not want to be the one in the ceremony signing the agreement to hand over the reins of Taiwan to China, so they push Tsai to be the fall guy for them to do the dirty job in case of DPP wins the coming election. Poor Tsai.
Oro Invictus
While I enjoy how you somehow believe Taiwan will just “hand over” its sovereignty as a forgone conclusion despite the vast majority of observers outside the PRC government not expecting that to present itself as even a plausible consideration in the foreseeable future, what I find more fascinating is the sheer passive-aggressiveness of this and almost all the other statements you have made here; indeed, this communication “quirk” is something you share with the PRC Government (of course, some have speculated this is because you may actually be a member of their propaganda department or such, but I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you’re not).
Honestly, if passive-aggressiveness could act as a substitute for meaningful discourse and diplomacy, the PRC would rule the world.
Frank
The PRC does not want to rule the world.
Why cannot you non-Chinese understand that?
Oro Invictus
First off, I never actually said anything about intent; I was simply noting the sheer level of passive-aggressiveness the PRC employs far outstrips that of all the world’s other governments.
Second, basic geopolitical theory states that all nations, by their very nature, seek to achieve dominance over all other states, whether through martial and/or economic power (mind you, this does necessitate their short-term goals to be anything approaching haegemony, this principle refers to long-term aspirations); while I could point to the actions of the PRC as evidence of this alone, the truth is that all governments on Earth have this issue, not just the PRC.
Finally, I am troubled by your usage of the term “non-Chinese”, as it suggests a high level of xenophobia; alas, the failure of the modern nation-state is that it breeds people who are predisposed to view others in terms of their citizenship/ethnicity rather then as fellow humans. This is something that I try to make clear to others, so as to not have their image of myself tinted by the deleterious construct that is nationalism; my concerns with the PRC are rooted in the almost one and a half billion people who suffer under the whims of a few, who are not allowed to express themselves to their fullest and, thus, not allowed to contribute as fully as possible to our human enterprise. While there is nary a government on Earth that I believe truly serves the best interests of mankind, the PRC represents a government more repressive and more pernicious then any other currently in existence. Indeed, the route the PRC seeks to take for its ascension would not only be destructive to those it currently claims lordship over, but to the entire world; whether it be through ascension or (as seems more probable) implosion, the effects of the PRC’s actions truly make me fear for the people of this world.