Washington and Beijing seem to believe that the current pro-independence administration on Taiwan is on the way out, and that once it goes the island's relations with China and the United States will improve. Such a possibility always exists, but it is unlikely in Taiwan's social and political context.
While the erratic and increasingly unpopular president, Chen Shui-bian, may step down, his Democratic Progressive Party is likely to retain power.
To be sure, the DPP and Chen do appear weak. The president's son- in-law is in detention, under investigation for insider trading. Presidential aides are being accused of corruption, and every day brings new allegations.
Taiwan has been treading water under Chen's ineffective leadership. His administration has not focused on the economy, and instead has managed to offend traditional allies, such as the United States. Relations with China, where many Taiwanese companies have significant investments, have deteriorated on Chen's watch.
Still, the current crisis may not afford the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) a chance to return to power.
In the eyes of most Taiwanese, both the DPP and the KMT are tainted by corruption. If anything, the judiciary's current pursuit of DPP officials, including people close to the president, is a testament to the impartiality of DPP rule.
Earlier KMT rule was no less corrupt, yet investigations were few and far between, and much less vigorous. Right or wrong, most Taiwanese don't remember the KMT as the party that gave Taiwan its economic miracle; they remember a kleptocratic dictatorship.
The KMT has not handled the current crisis well. Its chairman, Ma Ying-jeou, is a charismatic politician but unsure of himself and surrounded by bitter rivals. The DPP, for all its many faults - above all a lack of focus on the economy - is a grassroots organization well-tuned to public opinion.
This is why I believe the current crisis is more of an opportunity for the DPP than for the KMT.
The only way for the DPP to retain power is to distance itself from President Chen. Already, a group of young DPP politicians has taken out a newspaper advertisement urging him to step down.
His resignation would help the DPP and position it well for the 2008 presidential elections. It is unlikely that Ma, who appears to lack a strong vision for Taiwan, would succeed in leading a KMT revival if Chen is gone.
The DPP revolution in Taiwan has been two-fold: One, an ethnic change in government from mainlander to Taiwanese; two, a change in ruling class, whereby an old elite relinquished power to a new group without cultural pedigree. This "omelet" cannot be undone without a political suicide, which the historically nimble DPP is unlikely to commit.
The KMT and the DPP are in a race whose outcome will be determined by their relative political competence - that is, sensitivity to popular sentiment. It is a fair assumption to make that as of today, the more sophisticated and responsive party is the DPP.
Observers often misunderstand the DPP's other key characteristic, that it is a revolutionary party. Its revolutionary idealism, in the guise of personal loyalty, should prevent the cancer of scandals from spreading to President Chen.
Chen's successors are likely to be less ideological and more pragmatic than Chen, including their policies toward China. And following the current scandals, whoever comes to power in Taiwan will also be cleaner.
Both Beijing and Washington must understand that however desirable it might be for current cross- straits relations, turning back the clock to KMT days in Taiwan is not realistic. A look at the aging crowds at opposition rallies should have alerted the Bush administration not to bet all its cards on Mayor Ma Ying-jeou of Taipei, who was welcomed with great fanfare during a recent visit to the United States.
The nature of past KMT rule, and the party's sorry state today, give the DPP enduring popularity, especially among Taiwan's youth. This is not a tragedy, for Taiwan or for cross-straits relations; it is a reality which all stakeholders will have to accept.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/12/opinion/edhu.php
發表於2006年6月12日 International Herald Tribune
