|
An historic victory
is at hand for the pan-greens
By Chen Yi-shen 陳儀深
In 2000, former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) left the Chinese Nationalist Party
(KMT.) In 2001, he called on the public to support a new party, the Taiwan
Solidarity Union (TSU), with the aim of building a legislative majority
consisting of 85 legislative seats for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
and 35 seats for the TSU, using the slogan “stabilize politics and strengthen
Taiwan.”
In the 2001 legislative elections, the TSU’s 8.5 percent of the vote gained them
13 seats. The DPP won 36.6 percent and gained 87 seats, compared with the KMT’s
31.3 percent and 68 seats. This happened because the People First Party (PFP)
split the vote and won 46 seats. While the pan-blue camp still had more than
half the seats, the DPP was the largest party in the legislature.
The 2004 legislative election was held after then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁)
was re-elected, giving the DPP 89 seats, the KMT 79 seats, the PFP 34 seats and
the TSU 12 seats, basically maintaining the situation from 2001.
However, in the 2008 legislative elections, the number of legislative seats was
cut to 113 and a new single district double ballot electoral system was
introduced. The DPP lost a lot of seats and of the 12 political parties in the
running, only the KMT and the DPP gained more than the 5 percent of the vote
required to enter the legislature. It is commonly believed this was the result
of the two main parties joining hands to amend the Constitution and using the
new system to block smaller parties.
These points demonstrate how the influence of various political parties has
changed in legislative elections.
If things are examined from the perspective of policy standpoints, it can be
seen that during Chen’s two terms, he wavered between a “New Middle Way” and
calls for including his view that there is one country on each side of the
Taiwan Strait in the Republic of China Constitution.
Lee and the TSU considered rejecting Taiwanese independence in order to find a
new way of doing things and amending their party charter to place them on the
center-left. However, once smaller parties lose their legislative
representation, they also lose the power to influence the overall situation.
During their time in office, the DPP’s China policies swayed back and forth
between liberalization and management, and the TSU spared no effort in
monitoring them. For example, in 2006, the Taiwan Advocates think tank gathered
experts, academics and pro--localization groups for a conference on economic
growth that laid down conditions for liberalizing policies regulating direct
flights to China, chartered flights, Taiwanese banks opening up in China and
Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan.
The TSU showed a responsible attitude and did not oppose things merely for the
sake of opposing them, an attitude the party should continue to follow.
In conclusion, the birth of the TSU cannot be separated from Lee’s initial calls
for “stabilizing politics and strengthening Taiwan” and it was predestined to
have close links with the DPP. One could also say the TSU and the DPP stood to
gain by coming together and stood to lose by splitting.
Currently, DPP Chairperson and presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and TSU
Chairman Huang Kun-huei (黃昆輝) get along well and when it comes to issues like
cross-strait policies and national identity, they complement each other.
Hopefully the atmosphere of a united pan-green front will return so we can see a
green party gain power once more, giving these two pro-localization parties the
chance to make history.
Chen Yi-shen is an associate research fellow in the Institute of Modern
History at Academia Sinica.
Translated by Drew Cameron
|
