President Elect Chen Shui Bian and KMT dissident candidate James Soong polled a combined 76% of the 83% voters turned out in last Saturday’s election – 92% of the votes say no to the KMT.  Already many of the local governments in Taiwan are under DPP rule, the tenth Presidential election now won by a DPP candidate puts an end to the era of the KMT as the grand political master for Taiwan. In Asian politics, the KMT’s fate follows in the footsteps of the Congress Party of India, Golkar in Indonesia and the LDP in Japan.

 President-elect Chen has also vehemently rejected the “one country two system”reunification formula insisted by Beijing, he reiterated the sovereignty of the Taiwanese people.  His rhetoric towards China has turned gentle in the last weeks of the election and has offered conciliatory gestures towards Beijing. But the message is very clear; the people of Taiwan are a self-determined lot, they do not want to surrender that sovereignty to any one that is not elected by them. Admittedly, the support to Chen’s pro-independence stance is mixed, and many have wished for James Soong
as the new president, a kind of middle ground candidate to ease the tensions between the straits. Now, with the election of Chen, Beijing and the people of Taiwan have to deal with a new reality. 

The Road to Democracy

Taiwan’s transformation to democracy has been stunning by any standard, remarkable progress was accomplished within a decade. In fact, I am tempted to call this another ‘Taiwan miracle.” The strength of its middle class and the courage of its intellectuals are most impressive, both a model and envy of many developing Asian societies. The vote on May 18 is a strong denial of the misrule, decadence and corruption of the KMT, who in spite of efforts to reinvent itself, has failed to keep pace with the aspirations of an affluent, globally oriented, assertive and confident populace. The old style politics and economics of collusion between politicians, the elite and business interests received a strong denial from a maturing civil society. We must also note that today, many of the successful business and opinion leaders, among them Acer’s Stan Shih, Academia Sineca’s Dr Lee Yuen Tze hail from very humble backgrounds. Another point to note is that in spite of the enormous command of resources, KMT fail to retain its grasp on the people; money can no longer buy votes any more. With this Taiwan enters developed society status.

Maturing Civil Society

 The reason to explain the power shift witnessed in Taiwan today is the maturing of civil society. The people, from all walks of life, are very engaged in the election process, and they are not shy about making known their dissatisfaction with the government or campaigning for the people they support.  On many occasions, the government failed in its effort to relief the suffering of the people. Take the 921 earthquake for example, volunteer groups are in the forefront in disaster relief and rebuilding. The government has been conspicuously absent from the scene and provided no leadership at all. Academics and business leaders’ involvement in the election process displayed profiles of courage; unlike most intellectuals in other Asian countries, they stay by the sideline. The aspiration contain in the vote  for Chen is a vote for a true government of the people for the people, as Chen comes from the grassroots, and retains very grassroots demeanors. An aspiration the Chinese people cherished for a very long time.

 Apart from widespread education and affluence, the de-coupling of business with politics further helps the remarkable progress made in Taiwanese democracy.  Today Taiwan boasts of many world class industries that thrive on their own competence, business acumen and international outreach.   As the Taiwanese economy modernizes and globalizes, fewer and fewer businesses depend on favors from local bureaucrats and politicians. In fact, the reverse is true; the government needs to persuade businesses to stay home rather than to migrate outwards. Small and medium sized businesspeople, educated and confident, and further enlightened by the open debate made available by a vocal and open media, have become very assertive. Academics, which are government employees, have no qualms about taking a different position from that of the government. I asked a professor friend in Taiwan who he thinks the winner will be. He said, it does not matter that much as long as the winner is not from the KMT!

The Wisdom of One Country Two System

 It is well known that Mr. Deng Xia Peng formulated the One country two systems as a gradual transition strategy to reunify all Chinese territories. In order to close the gap between the [systems in the] mainland and these societies, the idea is to have a gradual merger, so that these societies blend in with each other. Although the time frame set is 50 years, Mr. Deng has no set dateline on eventual reunification, he say the one country two system can be for 100 years or any length of time that is needed. Hong Kong and Macao have both been reunited with the mainland under this framework. The consensus in Taiwan is to maintain the status quo, no reunification.  However Beijing in recent months seems to have stepped up the timetable for resolution of the Taiwan question; perhaps in part due to rising independence sentiments on the island. 

How sound is the One country two system? It is too early to tell with Hong Kong and Macau’s experience. Also it must be pointed out that the political landscape and sophistication of the people in Taiwan are different from those in Hong Kong and Macao. The economies of Hong Kong and Macao have long been integrated with China, and these two territories have never been politically vibrant societies. For example, in Hong Kong, there was little political agitation for direct representation in government under the British although semblance of democracy was introduced in the twilight days of the last governor Chris Patten. The pace of democratization has been remarkable in Taiwan in the past decade, all levels of society are involved; the media, the intellectuals, the business leaders, the middle class and the political parties. 

Now the new Taiwan president has vehemently rejected China’s One Country Two-System formula. The world understands China’s insistence of the one country two system. But what kind of future union will be acceptable by both? Would Dr Lee Yuen Tze be able to bridge the gap of understanding of global realities; between a mainframe thinking nation-state regime who wants to unify all territories and the progressive freedom and independence of autonomous units desired by people living in a network world? 

Union of a Different Kind?

Both China and the new government in Taiwan must exercise the highest degree of wisdom to ensure peace, stability and prosperity of the region. No one in Taiwan doubts his or her future is linked with the mainland. Taiwanese business have already invested close to USD40 billion on the mainland, migrated much of their operations there, and some have even set up homes there. There are now 200,000 small and medium sized business people shuttling between the straits. Young Internet startups in Taiwan tell me those venture capitalists won’t look at their company if it is only a dotcom.tw. The future lies in a linking up with China. 

But having come so far on their own, the strong yearning for self-determination and democracy is understandable. The Taiwanese people are not ready to throw all that to the wind; they have managed a peaceful [albeit noisy and chaotic] transition of power from half a century of KMT rule, they now elect their own President and legislature, and they have a robust, independent and open media. 

It seems to me, the Taiwanese and their leaders may not have a clear idea of what that new reunification format is, although some are talking about some kind of cultural union.  They also know that there must be a rapid breakthrough to the current impasse with Beijing. They are however very clear on what they don’t want; not one country two system. How the cross-strait relations play out in the future would be of interest and importance to everyone in Asia, and for that matter in the world. For now, we know for sure a new era has dawned on Asian democracy.

Feedback Welcomed!

Kuala Lumpur, March 24, 2000

The Malaysian Economy: A Perspective on Competitiveness Part I: Arresting the Decline in Competitiveness Part II: Is the Priority Growth or Restructuring? China Rising NOW, not in the future Hello! Look What's Happening Today Make English Ours Towards a Pragmatic Language Policy Bringing English to the Fore Learning English can reinforce Nationalism: PM The future of Taiwan and the Mainland: What kind of union? Soil Restoration and Sustainable Farming Public Complaints Bureau, PM's Dept Syabas, Nanyang Siang Pau! Globalization makes all Sleepless in Seattle Malaysian Direct Election on the Net The Costly Difference between Metric and English Instilling a Sense of Responsibility - The Will to Discipline Why should My Religion be Anybody's Business? Anybody's Child wants to be a Rescue Worker or Peacekeeper? Are Consumers Winning the War on Genetically Modified Crops? Pahlawan Thoughts MORE HERE!

Search for ANY  Book or Author!