|
EDITORIAL: The DPP
must go on the offensive
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has echoed criticism that President Ma
Ying-jeou (馬英九) is a “bumbler” and attacked his refusal to set aside political
antagonism and call a national affairs conference to resolve the nation’s
problems.
However, when the party looks at itself in the mirror, it sees another Ma.
The DPP has mostly bumbled along since losing the presidential election, and
meaningful conversation between party heavyweights seems too much to ask.
There is no better example of this than the establishment of the party’s China
Affairs Committee and the quarrel over its “new” China policy, both of which are
critical for the party to return to power in 2016.
Regarding China, everything except for the necessity of closer cross-strait
engagement is a matter of debate, especially after former premier Frank Hsieh’s
(謝長廷) landmark visit, where he submitted his proposal of “constitutions with
different interpretations (憲法各表).”
Numerous issues have been raised by Hsieh and others, who have asked whether the
DPP still supports Taiwanese independence, whether the party recognizes the
Constitution, the urgency of formulating a new China policy and what the party’s
“real” China policy is.
Regarding the much-anticipated China Affairs Committee, which DPP Chairman Su
Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) pledged to set up during the party chairmanship election
campaign, what party members care about most is who would lead it, and who would
sit on it.
The friction between Su and Hsieh has been heatedly discussed, with former DPP
chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) also dragged into their power games.
Some have also argued about the name of the committee and suggested replacing
“China” with “cross-strait” or “mainland” to show goodwill to the Chinese.
Although great importance has been placed on the DPP’s China policy and on its
China Affairs Committee, it was personal agendas and a factional fight for power
rather than discussions about how the party would engage China that have
dominated a process which was supposed to transform the party.
The DPP has talked of engaging Beijing “proactively with supreme confidence” as
being crucial for its development, but it was political infighting and moments
of self-doubt that stood out over the past 10 months.
Su’s announcement of the establishment of the committee and his doubling as its
convener on Wednesday did not look like the end of the argument, but instead
opened a new front in the war between party factions.
It remains to be seen if Hsieh chooses to walk his own path after not being
appointed as committee chairman. Also worth watching will be the reactions of
Tsai and the staunchly pro-independence wing of the party, among them former
premier Yu Shyi-kun (游錫堃) and several peripheral groups, which remain
influential among DPP supporters.
The worst-case scenario for the party would be all-out war between rival
factions and a prolonged process of transformation.
Domestically, while the DPP has unveiled its plan of a “sensible economy” to
promote fairness of distribution, local industrial development and employment —
policies that pointed out what Ma has not addressed — it has failed to convince
the public that it would be a better ruling party next time around.
Too often it has lamented its minority in the legislature, which it says is why
DPP lawmakers cannot get anything moving. While the claim is legitimate, the
party caucus should go on the offensive with initiatives that would resonate
with the public rather than always playing a passive, defensive role.
The last thing the public want to see is that the DPP only knows how to
criticize Ma but cannot set an agenda of its own and come up with proposals to
make Taiwan a better country.
The DPP will need to be consolidated, strong and assertive in the face of major
challenges from China and a sluggish economy in order to win power back.
The public also want it to be that way.
|
