|
The Liberty Times
Editorial: Taiwan needs to wise up to KMT
On Tuesday last week, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s Special Investigation
Division (SID) released the report of its investigation into the Yu Chang
Biologics Co, now known as TaiMed Biologics, case. This was the case in which
former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was
accused of wrongdoing, allegations that may well have affected the outcome of
the presidential election earlier this year. The findings of the investigation —
that there was no legal case to answer — come as no surprise. Unfortunately,
even though this helps Tsai clear her name, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) remains
in office. Taiwanese democracy clearly still has some way to go.
Ma was floundering in the last stages of his re-election campaign, and the
entire party-state apparatus was mobilized over the Yu Chang case. Executive
neutrality was effectively abandoned, in a way reminiscent of the Cultural
Revolution in China. Tsai and numerous academics were thrown to the lions. And
so it was that Ma, who had presided over a first term marred with all manner of
broken campaign promises, secured a second term. If the Chinese Nationalist
Party (KMT) continues this sort of behavior in future presidential elections, it
does not bode well for Taiwanese democracy.
Now that it has been established that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by
Tsai in the Yu Chang case, the DPP have criticized individuals such as Vice
President Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and his wife, Tsai Ling-yi (蔡令怡), then-Council for
Economic Planning and Development (CEPD) minister Christina Liu (劉憶如), KMT
Legislator Hsieh Kuo-liang (謝國樑), Deputy Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), former
Executive Yuan secretary-general Lin Yi-shih (林益世) and KMT Taipei City Councilor
Lai Su-ju (賴素如) for their attacks on Tsai over the case and for failing to
retract their accusations when the original allegations were found to be
baseless.
The KMT believes that trashing the reputation of its political opponents is fair
currency when it comes to holding on to power, and the people making the
accusations continue with impunity after they have been handed electoral
victory. The party, incompetent in power and guilty of selling Taiwan out,
continues to talk of social justice, but it is all about manipulation.
Liu is clearly a case in point. During the presidential campaign, when the
global economy was going from bad to worse and the governments of countries all
over the world were grappling with the causes, trying to make sure their own
economies did not get dragged into the mire, Liu, in her capacity as CEPD
minister, chose to concentrate instead on the Yu Chang case. She even resorted
to proffering doctored documents as “evidence” to implicate Tsai, although she
refused to concede any wrongdoing of her own when these documents were revealed
to be forgeries.
Her hard work did not go unrewarded, and when the dust had settled from the
election, she was handed the post of minister of finance. Who knows if karma was
at work: Soon after this, she was forced to stand down over her handling of the
introduction of the unpopular capital gains tax on securities transactions. Ma
entirely failed to stand by her. It is not clear whether Liu had simply already
served her purpose, and her services were no longer required, but the whole
affair was another serious blow to democracy in this country.
Naturally, the KMT’s dodgy dealings were not restricted to the Yu Chang case.
Just as alarming was the use to which Ma put the party’s assets, assets that he
had previously promised to sell off. During the campaign, we were treated to
blanket advertising, propaganda and embedded marketing courtesy of the various
KMT-owned media outlets and organizations, and were subject to wave upon wave of
misinformation. However, the most blatant example of misinformation this year
came from the Control Yuan, which published figures for party finances and
expenditure suggesting that Tsai’s political contributions and campaign funds
were greater than Ma’s.
It begs the question: Just how much of the political contributions Ma has access
to are not publicly declared? How much of his campaign funds were never
reported? Not even the judiciary knows exactly what is going on. What other
grubby little secrets is the party keeping from us?
Ma won far fewer votes this time compared with 2008, and was guilty of many
counts of backtracking on promises even before his second term had officially
begun. The worst offenses were the price hikes for electricity and gas, and the
introduction of the capital gains tax on securities transactions. Ma’s approach
of making and implementing decisions with little or no prior consultation led to
an increase in the cost of living and a decline in the stock market transaction
rate. This, together with the EU debt crisis, contributed to a perfect storm
that hit both our domestic and international trade. Ordinary people are now
really feeling the pinch.
After all this, Ma still had the effrontery to claim he understands economics.
Come the eve of the May 20 inauguration ceremony for his second term, Ma’s
popularity rating had fallen to about 20 percent, and this fell once more, to
just over 10 percent, when he was hit by the investigation into allegations of
corruption involving his comrade-in-arms, Lin Yi-shih. Ma, who has himself said
that now he can no longer seek re-election and therefore does not face any
electoral pressure, has shown his true colors. The electorate can finally see
that he is in it for himself, and not for the good of the country or the people
living in it.
The problem is, how could people who were taken for a ride back in 2008, with
all those campaign promises about 6 percent economic growth each year, per
capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate lower than 3 percent by this
year, fall for the same lies four years later? If someone runs off with their
votes on the strength of empty promises, and then they vote for them again, who
is the fool — the one making the empty promises, or the ones taking their word
that they would make good on them this time round?
One thing is for certain: If you let them, people will always try to take
advantage of you. The Taiwanese electorate really has to wise up, or this is
just going to happen again and again. It is difficult to say for sure who the
KMT is going to offer up as a presidential candidate in three years’ time, but
odds are it will still be using the ill-gotten party assets that it had promised
to discard. If Taiwanese allow themselves to be “Yu Chang-ed” again come the
next presidential election, and let the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
take them for another ride, they will be like turkeys voting for Thanksgiving.
Translated by Paul Cooper
|
