|
Taiwanese democracy,
Stalin-style
By Joseph Wu 吳釗燮
Since ITS first democratic presidential election in 1996, Taiwan has been
praised by the international community as a “beacon of democracy to be emulated
by other Asian countries.”
Those were the words used by the White House in March 2008 to congratulate the
Taiwanese people for having another open, fair and free presidential election.
As Taiwan’s representative in Washington, I was very proud to hear those words,
even though I sadly had to leave that government position because my party had
lost the election.
In the past few years, even though many people in and outside Taiwan continue to
question the motivations and practices of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
government in employing judicial means to pursue opposition leaders and worry
about the downgrading of the freedom of the press, a strong belief stays alive
that Taiwan will remain democratic because any government could always be
replaced in the next democratic election.
Nevertheless, this strong belief has to be based on the principle that the
players faithfully follow the democratic rules of the game. The KMT government’s
recent accusations leveled against Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), who is also a presidential candidate perhaps
popular enough to unseat incumbent President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), over the Yu
Chang Biologics Co investment case and the subsequent judicial action are
threatening to destroy Taiwan’s democracy.
It is unheard of, and certainly inconceivable, for any government in a mature
democracy to utilize judicial power to hunt down an opposition candidate at the
very last stage of a presidential election. It is obviously anti-democratic if
this happens, particularly when the accusations were nothing but fabrications
and the key document used to level the accusations was found to be blatantly
fraudulent.
In any established democracy, when a government is caught red-handed in such a
major embarrassment, the key officials would either be impeached or forced to
resign. Not in Taiwan, however — Taiwan’s democracy is still young and remnants
of past authoritarianism are still alive and under cover in government
institutions.
They have pursued opposition leaders through judicial means and have caused
psychological trauma to many of those found innocent after lengthy tortures by
trial. They have pressured a reputable journal not to conduct election and
political surveys. They also coordinate major media outlets in their highly
intensive smear campaigns against the opposition. If one watches KMT-leaning
evening TV talk shows and listens to the words the commentators use, one could
easily mistake them for Red Guards at the height of the People’s Republic of
China’s Cultural Revolution. Taiwanese tolerate this, because we believe in
tolerance and diversity.
The KMT under former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and the Chinese Communist
Party were joked about by democracy activists as being the twin sons of Joseph
Stalin. Fortunately, that time has passed and since 1996, Taiwanese have
exercised their power to select their national leader.
However, if Ma is able to successfully use judicial means to hunt down the DPP’s
presidential candidate, Taiwan would certainly slide backward into its
authoritarian past. Ma would go down in history as the true heir to Chiang, the
dictator that ruled Taiwan the Stalinist way.
Just a few days ago, international supporters of Taiwanese democracy joined
hands to establish the International Committee for Fair Elections in Taiwan. The
purpose of the organization is to ensure a fair and free presidential election
next month. I am very certain that the international observers would be shocked
to learn that the KMT has been entertaining the idea of implicating and
entangling its main competitor in the presidential race by judicial means
through a badly-weaved fabrication.
About two weeks ago, the US House of Representatives’ Committee on Foreign
Affairs Chairperson Ileana Ros-Lehtinen declared that she would ensure no
backsliding of Taiwan’s democracy, so that it could continue to be a beacon
shining its bright light across the Taiwan Strait onto the imprisoned people
under communist rule. What is utterly unfortunate is that the KMT government
snubbed her declaration by its Red Guard-style smear campaign and judicial
actions against the key opposition presidential candidate.
Taiwan has gone through two rounds of peaceful transfer of power after 1996.
According to Samuel Huntington, Taiwan should have consolidated its democracy.
However, if the incumbent president chooses to do things like what have been
done in the past few days as an option to salvage his re-election, it is
doubtful whether the country could remain democratic.
Taiwanese should feel ashamed if democracy watchers from around the world expect
an admirable liberal democracy in Taiwan, only to find a Stalinist USSR when
they arrive here after the elections.
Joseph Wu is former chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council and a former
representative to the US.
|
