BREAKING: Su, Hsieh, drop out of DPP Chairmanship race + stuff

Me at the historic Ta-an train station outside Houli on Fumei Road. The station and area are being developed as tourism area.

Today both Su Tseng-cheng and Frank Hsieh announced that they would not run for the DPP Chairmanship position. This leaves it open for Tsai Ing-wen. I hope, against hope, that the DPP has had an attack of sense and will appoint one person to run the party while another runs as its Presidential candidate.

Yesterday this very frustrating interview of Taiwan expert Shelley Rigger by Jeffery Wasserstrom appeared in Dissent Quarterly. Her heart is in the right place, judging from her comments on neoliberalism and its discontents, but much of her commentary on Taiwan and the services pact consists of KMT talking points presented as actual analysis. Not much point in critiquing neoliberalism if you are just going to turn around and forward the propaganda. Ben Goren rakes it over the coals here.

In addition to Rigger's issues, the other thing that peeved me about this piece is that there are many credentialed academics who have been down at the protests such as Ketty Chen, Stephane Corcuff, Frank Muyard, Ian Rowen (actually inside the LY), Kerim Friedman,and several others plus a bunch of local academics who would have been happy to talk, and a raft of experienced and savvy journalists, including people like J Michael Cole, Jenny Hsu, Michael Fahey, who writes from time to time for the SCMP and who is an extremely sharp observer of Taiwan politics, Martin Williams, who is incredibly knowledgeable and witty as hell, and Dennis Engbarth, who writes for IPS and was present in the Executive Yuan when the police attacked the protesters there, and whose knowledge of Taiwan politics runs deeper than anyone I know, scholar or no. But who gets the interview? Rigger, who is 12,000 kilometers from the action and is clearly out of touch.

And people wonder why I bike 200 kms a week. It stems off the madness from contemplating the workings of our universe.

The Friday night mess: the police withdrew the protest permit for the ART on Friday, in the usual manner of institutions wreaking vengeance on perceived opponents. The Alliance of Referendum for Taiwan, which anyone who has gone down to the legislature or Foreign Ministry has seen on the corner of Chinan and Chungshan, had their longtime permit to protest revoked, for helping out in the recent student protest. This sparked a small protest of about 1,000 appearing in front of the police station there on Friday night. The protesters, droll to the core, said they didn't need a permit to be there since they were just "passing by," echoing the city's refusal to press charges against alleged gangster Chang An-lo for his "counterprotest" because he was just "passing by." There were a few tussles on Friday night, but nothing too serious.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

DPP Chairman Su's visit to the US

Went out yesterday to collect bug pics for a post but didn't shoot any good ones. But I did find this lovely bit of mimicry. Leaf mimicry is common (and beautiful) among butterflies and moths in Taiwan.

I blogged on DPP Chairman Su's visit to Taiwan over at Asian Correspondent
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

More Polls....and the environment

A couple of polls out: Global Views has its most recent party ID tracking poll out. More people say they are KMT/lean KMT than are DPP/lean DPP. With such a large number of people saying they are "independents" -- 28% it is likely that the poll vastly underestimates the number of pan-Greens.

The KMT news organ reports in English on the DPP candidates versus Ma Ying-jeou:

According to a survey commissioned by the Taipei-based Broadcasting Corporation of China, President Ma Ying-jeou is not a shoo-in to win a second term. If President Ma represents the KMT, and Tsai Ing-wen the DPP in the 2012 Presidential election, the survey shows that President Ma would have a support rating of 36.35%, and Tsai Ing-wen 34.48%. If President Ma represents the KMT, and Su Tseng-chang the DPP in the 2012 Presidential election, the survey shows that President Ma would receive a support rating of 36.35%, and Su Tseng-chang 34.55%. In either case, 20% of the voters remained undecided.

Undecided is an enormous number of voters and is likely to include more pan-Greens than pan-Blues. It is still early, but if these numbers are anywhere near valid, it is good news for the good guys.


The Kuokuang Petrochemical complex in Changhua was the subject of a visit by all three candidates the other day. Ma was silenced and then later heckled. But recall that the Kuokuang project was approved by the DPP when current Presidential hopeful Su Tseng-chang was premier. According to the KMT report, Su humbly apologized for that decision. The fact that Tsai was reared in the neoliberal religion while Su is a consummate developmentalist state politician means that the environment will get no more than lip service in this election.

As a friend of mine noted, the opposition to Kuokuang may be vocal at the moment, but if the locals were seriously polled, you'd probably find that local supporters of the project outnumbered the opposition. I have biked from time to time in that area along the coast south of Lukang in Changhua and down through Yunlin. It is one of the most desolate, depressed areas of Taiwan, in my opinion, rather like the Valley of Ashes in The Great Gatsby. It could certainly use a boost, as the Taipei Times admonished today:

Anti-Kuokuang sentiment fomented when people became suspicious that the Ma administration had lost its neutrality and decided to push ahead with the project even before the Environmental Impact Assessment had been completed. Public Construction Commission Minister Lee Hong-yuan (李鴻源) has expressed concern about the impact of the plant on water and soil conservation, and the potential worsening of the problem of land subsidence, which may even compromise the safety of the Yunlin stretch of the High Speed Rail. His opinion has not changed. This is something that should be taken very seriously.

We have learned from last year’s fires at Formosa Petrochemical Corp’s sixth naphtha cracker and the current nuclear incident in Japan that just because a government says something does not make it true. People are more sensitive now about the possibility of an environmental disaster. If the government does give the go-ahead for the plant, can Ma guarantee the decision will not come back to haunt Taiwan?

Cities in Changhua County and Fangyuan Township (芳苑) need economic regeneration, but is Kuokuang the answer? Should the plant turn into an environmental nightmare, could local people cope?

For more information on land subsidence and other issues surrounding this plant, see this post I wrote a while back. But the cold hard fact is that the number of large developmentalist state projects like this killed for environmental reasons is infintesimal. Since both parties have approved many similar developmentalist state projects around the island that ran into opposition from environmentalists, it does not appear that the environment is really going to be a huge issue in this election -- the mud from these projects sticks to everyone.

But anything could happen.....
___________
Daily Links:

• Jens Kastner in Asia Times says ECFA critics too quick off the mark.
• New book out on Taiwan-Japan relations in the Imperial era.
• KMT once again pushing the myth that Chinese gold saved Taiwan's economy. I have discussed why this is 'gwash before here. 
• J Michael Cole writes on why a partial missile drawdown by China isn't worth much to Taiwan. But it could be a major coup for the KMT in the coming elections.  
• Meanwhile, Randplanet still hasn't discovered the concepts of conservation or technological progress. Or that wind machines don't render useless all the land they sit on. Is no one submitting sane and sensible letters to the Taipei Times?

_______________________ 
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Tsai or Su for 2012?

Article 23 of the Basic Environment Act reads:

The government shall establish plans to gradually achieve the goal of becoming a nuclear-free country. The government shall also strengthen nuclear safety management and control, protections against radiation, and the management of radioactive materials and monitoring of environmental radiation to safeguard the public from the dangers of radiation exposure.

As the Taipei Times noted today in its editorial, DPP policy has always been to oppose nuclear power, and it was the DPP that added the nuclear-free homeland clause to the Basic Law. Recently DPP Chairman Tsai Ing-wen, battling former Premier Su Tseng-chang for the DPP presidential candidacy, called for a nuclear-free homeland by 2025, in the wake of the disaster at Fukushima. These are easily accomplished plans, as sensible as clinically insane contract law permits. The TT says:

Tsai’s suggestion for a nuclear-free homeland does not call for an immediate halt to construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant or closure of the three plants that are in operation. Instead, as halting construction would be more expensive than completing it because of breach-of-contract costs, Tsai proposes that construction should be completed, but that the plant not be operated commercially after completion. Also, the three existing plants would not have their operations extended when they reach the end of their operational life by 2025.

Tsai's bold call appears to have caught her rival Su Tseng off guard; he came out a more conservative position, without a timetable. But the swiftness and surety of her thrust shows that she has smart advice and is not afraid to take the right position.

With the two emerging as the leading candidates as observers had long felt would be the case, more than just a primary is going on. Su is really the last lion of old martial law generation, along with former Vice-President Annette Lu, who hopefully will fade from politics soon, and the DPP Mayor of Kaohsiung, Chen Chu, who will never operate at the national level. Su helped co-found the DPP and was one of the lawyers for the Kaohsiung 8. Tsai represents the next generation of DPP leaders. Generational transition is symbolized by this primary.

Bruce Jacobs, the well-known academic who has made a career out of studying local politics in Taiwan argued in the Taipei Times earlier this week that Su was the ideal candidate. He points out that (1) Su is a proven election winner; (2) Su is a proven and able administrator; and (3) polls have Su doing better against KMT President Ma than Tsai.

Jacobs also says that Su will do better with swing voters, whom he claims constitute a fifth to a quarter of the electorate. In 2008, the DPP vote total fell from 50 to 42% as swing voters switched away from the DPP. Maybe 20-25% of the voting population claims to be a swing voter -- though I suspect a lot of those "independents" are simply DPPers being quiet about allegiances. The fact is that in the 2008 only 8% of voters "switched", accounting for Ma's 16 point victory. Perhaps the other 12-17% of the swing voters canceled each other out switching back and forth, but my own suspicion is that the swing vote is roughly half what Jacobs says it is. Consider that the DPP's Chen Shui-bian took 39% of the vote in 2000, with KMT Lien Chan and PFP Soong Chu-yu taking 61%. Do the math -- it took only a 11% swing to bring the election to Chen at 50% in 2004. The 2008 swing was just 8%. The "swing" vote masks the larger, very longterm trend of voters becoming Green over time as people become more comfortable voting for the DPP.

Jacob's arguments for Both (1) and (2) are certainly true. For (3), things are slightly more equivocal. The Taipei Times rounded up some polls earlier this month:

According to cable news station TVBS’ survey, if the election were held now, Tsai would receive 34 percent of the vote against 41 percent for President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). Su would take 36 percent against Ma’s 37 percent.

A poll by the Chinese-language China Times showed that Tsai would lose by 6 percent with 30 percent of the vote, with Ma taking 36 percent. Su would get 32 percent to Ma’s 38 percent.

The Chinese-language Apple Daily suggested that both Tsai and Su have higher ratings than Ma. Tsai would receive 49.4 percent against Ma’s 34.3 percent, while Su would get 51.6 percent to Ma’s 29.8 percent.

.....

The China Times poll went a step further, comparing Tsai directly with Su. The newspaper said 32 percent felt Su was better suited to run for president, while 27 percent backed Tsai.

In most polls Su is ahead or tied with Tsai.....

Meanwhile Sophia Solivio fired off a riposte against Jacobs' position in the Taipei Times, arguing that Tsai was the better choice. She contended that the flip side of Su's able administration is a remarkable lack of imagination and leadership in policy initiatives.

During the announcement of his bid for the DPP presidential nomination, Su insisted “Taiwan has been floating in the open sea” and “we need a strong leader during times like this, a helmsman who is of strong will,” but on cross-strait issues, Su also mentioned, “there is no need to advocate new and novel ideas or policies.” Will Su’s lack of innovative ideas transform Taiwan into a country “where everyone has a smile on their face”?

Silvio also argued that Tsai has repaired and reinvigorated the DPP, and appeals across generational and class lines just as Su does. Tsai is also endorsed by oldtime independence activists like the awesome Su Beng.

Despite the polls, Tsai might actually be the better candidate, for several reasons. It is quite true that Su is a proven administrator, but as the election of Ma himself shows, the public cares little for that qualification. Moreover, Su's long experience as County Chief of Pingtung and Taipei County -- note that he is popular in both the North and the South -- actually counts against him, for he could easily be spun in campaign propaganda as a wheeler-dealer with a finger in every pie. Having been in charge of many infrastructure projects, no doubt KMT operatives could dig up an alleged failure or two to throw at him. Tsai's lack of experience in this area actually helps in this regard, she has no skeletons, real or imagined, rattling around her non-existent administrative closet, although her lack of experience could become an issue. We're not into the election season yet so the KMT has not opened up on Su.

Further, voters in Taiwan respond strongly to social class issues. They like to vote for people from the class that they consider fit to run the nation. Chen Shui-bian's roots in a farming town in Tainan were always used to demonstrate a lack of class, at least to KMT voters. Tsai, on the other hand, comes from a wealthy family and has an overseas education, something many educated voters in Taiwan can identify with. Su has a strong Taiwanese flavor (which I love, along with his basso profundo speaking voice) that many light Blues will find offputting and "low class." He was educated at NTU, impressive to be sure, but lacking the social class markers that a foreign education conveys.

Tsai is nearly a decade younger than Su -- elections are endurance tests, and relative youthfulness is an asset.

Finally Tsai has another crossover appeal: she's of Hakka origin, born in Fangshan in Pingtung County. Hakkas are an important pro-KMT voting bloc, which the DPP is trying to pry from the KMT grip.

The DPP primary will give Tsai good practice in the rough and tumble of electoral politics at the national level. It will also be a test of party unity. Let's hope everyone passes.....

...your thoughts?
______________
Daily Links:

• Manila gets KittyHawked (DEF): serve Beijing by handing over 14 Taiwanese for prosecution? Thanks, and now we'll execute three of your nationals, even though you said you could prove them innocent. The sad thing is Manila is unlikely to learn any cogent lesson from this.
  
• China also buzzing Japanese ships with its helicopters again. Way to keep that goodwill up in Japan!
  
• Taiwan's GDP to fall marginally from Japan's troubles.
• Is Taiwan ready for the coming tourism boom? You bet! The government isn't, however.
• Lao Ren Cha with another great look at the low marriage rate among femmes here.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

TBVS Poll has Ma neck-n-neck with Tsai, Su

TVBS latest poll on the 2012 elections is out. The Chinese-owned, rabidly pro-KMT TV station has President Ma a point behind DPP Chairman Tsai Ing-wen at 38-39 (previous poll had Ma out in front 43-37), and even at 40-40 with Su Tseng-chang. He handily crushes Annette Lu and Frank Hsieh. Though Annette Lu can take some consolation from fact that Hsieh performs even more poorly than she does.

It's still early.....
_________________
Daily Links:

• Linnei to renovate historic tobacco houses.
• New NBR paper on Congress and Asia
• Activists vow large protest if gov't does not suspend work on the (incredibly stupid) fourth nuclear plant. I'm sure the gov't is quaking in its boots.....
• 10% chance of radiation hitting Taiwan. Sure.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

KMT takes 3 of 5, DPP gets more votes

It's hard to know where to begin with this election.

First, with the exception of Su Tseng-chang's defeat in Taipei, things went pretty much as I expected. Su Chia-chuan did extremely well in Taichung, but then DPP internals had him close. I did, however, expect things to be a lot closer in Taipei. Su's loss was a disappointment, but its magnitude was a defeat.

The local commentary on this election is excellent.....

Turning first to some of the analysis, Nathan Batto from Frozen Garlic had powerful and insightful review of events in, of all places, the rabidly pro-China WantChinaTimes. I quote:

The KMT won a majority of the mayoral seats, but it did not win a majority of the votes. In fact, the DPP nearly won a majority of votes, and its 49.9% outpaced the KMT by over 5%. To put this into context, the KMT won these same areas by a margin of 57-43% in the 2008 presidential election. The only time the DPP has gotten a higher percentage of votes in these five cities was in 2004 when the DPP got 51% and won the presidential election.

This year's elections covered areas with roughly 60% of all voters in the country. In last year's local elections, which covered all the other areas, the KMT won a narrow majority of the votes, 48%-45%.

Putting the two elections together, DPP candidates actually won more votes than KMT candidates. This is an enormous swing from the KMT's 58%-42% landslide in the 2008 presidential election. Granted, many of the votes that went to independent candidates in the 2009 and 2010 elections were drawn from the blue camp's pool of votes, but this is still a frightening result for the KMT.

The China Post, the pro-KMT English paper, made the same point:

Granted that large portions of swing votes were swung towards the KMT by the injuries former Vice President Lien Chan's son suffered in a Friday assassination attempt, it means the DPP could have even bigger potential in future elections.

Despite the defeat in Xinbei and Taichung, the DPP's strong performance in the two cities have actually come as a strong boost not only to the main opposition party, but also to its chairwoman, Tsai Ing-wen personally.

Tsai, who lost to KMT candidate Eric Chu in Xinbei by only about 110,000 votes, has further established her leadership firmly in the party and will now have strong claims to the DPP's candidacy in the 2012 presidential race.

Since taking over the helm of a party that slumped to the nadir in the 2008 presidential race, Tsai has since managed to guide it to victory in several local and national elections.

She has also steered the party towards a more centrist platform that avoids political ideologies — particularly those thorny issues centering around the possibility and necessity of Taiwan's independence. The shift has apparently convinced many neutral voters.

The entire piece is basically a warning about the rising power of the DPP. Just as important as the DPP's lead in the overall vote count was the striking decline of the KMT in the city councils. Batto points out that in the previous city council election the KMT took 183 seats; this time around it took just 130. The DPP rose from 118 to 130, continuing its steady chipping away at KMT dominance in these areas that has been taking place over the last few election cycles. The Taipei Times reports:

Elections yesterday to select a total of 314 city councilors in Taipei, Sinbei, Taichung, Tainan and Kaohsiung ended in a tie between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), with each winning 130 seats.

Non-partisan or independent candidates garnered 45 seats in the five city councils, while the pro-unification New Party won three seats — all in Taipei City — the People First Party (PFP), another pan-blue party, won four. The pan-green, pro-independence Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) took two seats.

Overall, 2,642,846 ballots (35.34 percent) were cast for the DPP, while 2,889,210 (38.63 percent) were cast for the KMT.

However, despite the "tie" in total numbers, excepting Tainan, the city councils remain controlled by the KMT and its allies. These councils, especially the Speaker position, are fonts of patronage funds to local factions allied to the major political parties, and control of them is essential in maintaining control of local political bases. Still, this augurs well for the future.

A couple of points. First, the amazing performance of Su Chia-chuan in Taichung. Su began light-years behind popular incumbent Mayor Jason Hu, and it is clear that if the election had been in two more weeks Su would have won. Su was parachuted into Taichung from down south and did not have local faction connections. He ran a low key, positive campaign that patiently chipped away at Hu's massive initial lead. Fantastic work!

That said, I am not as certain as everyone else that this represents a permanent gain for the DPP in Taichung. Recall that the Taichung municipality is being formed from a blending of Taichung county and Taichung city. Su's gains in Taichung stemmed in part from several not-to-be repeated factors. First, Hu ran a terrible campaign out in the county, partly because as the incumbent he simply didn't have the time. Will that really happen in the next election? Second, the outgoing county chief, a KMT politician, was accused of basically going AWOL from his job since his position was disappearing, hurting the KMT in the county. Third, some of the local factions out in the county and Hu had a falling out. With Hu now in charge of the flow of resources for local patronage jobs, expect relations to be patched up in many areas. Fourth, Su Chia-chuan ran a great campaign. Will the next candidate do that? How many times has even the same candidate had two excellent campaigns in successive runs for the same office? As always, we'll have to wait for the next election to see how stable all this is.

Here are some things to take away. Despite not winning major seats the excellent performance of the main DPP candidates had an across the board boost for the DPP at the local level. For example, the number of city councilmen wearing DPP colors rose from 16 to 28 in Taipei County/Xinbei as the DPP turnout was large (the KMT turnout was even larger) as a result of Tsai's excellent campaign (overall turnout was just over 70%). The million votes that Tsai got in Xinbei actually exceeded the number of votes Chen Shui-bian received in that same area in 2004.

And the shooting incident? KMT legislators are claiming that it gave the KMT a big boost. The CNA says:

Commenting on the election-eve shooting of Lien Sheng-wen, KMT Legislator Sun Da-chien said it certainly shifted the course of the elections and contributed to his party's narrow win.

Many KMT supporters who may have been reluctant to vote were shocked by the incident and empathized with Lien Chan's visible pain and agony after his son was shot, Sun said.

"We would not have secured the win without Lien Chan, " Sun said, adding that at least 3 percent of the KMT votes resulted directly from the shooting.

He however did not explain how he had arrived at that estimate.

KMT legislator Hsu Shu-po expressed a similar view, saying that there are only two kinds of votes that could affect election results overnight -- bought votes and sympathy votes.

"Taiwanese people are extremely nice, and it's very easy to get them to vote for the candidates by creating sympathy for them, " he said.

He said the media coverage of Lien Sheng-wen's shooting Friday helped bring unity to the KMT. Lien is not just anybody -- his father is a man who has a lot of connections and political influence, Hsu said.

Hung Yu-hung, a political commentator, said the shooting incident had a major impact on Saturday's elections, especially among undecided voters in Taipei who want greater stability.

To their credit, publicly DPP heavyweights have not blamed the shooting incident in public. I suspect its effect was not very great.

How you read the effect of the shooting incident may influence your analysis of Su Tseng-cheng's presidential hopes, which everyone says took a big hit as a result of the extent of his defeat. Tsai is clearly now a dominant figure, not merely the chairman, she has proved she can run an excellent campaign and get out the vote, as well as sweep DPPers into office on her coattails. Su Chia-chuan has also been catapulted into prominence. But the Presidential election is two years away, and anything can happen. Frank Hsieh is still out there, and the gods alone know what effect Chen Shui-bian will have on things if he is ever released. Once again, my heartfelt thanks go out to the KMT for muzzling him and making sure he could not disturb the focus on the DPP's future.

Finally, as I've noted before, the new municipalities are going to cause new factional and local party re-alignments as new resources pour into these communities and are distributed through the patronage networks. The KMT is utterly dependent on its relationships with local factions for its power base, but the DPP is also involved with them. Moreover, these new regional amalgamations will formally bring together local factions in regional political systems, local factions that KMT policy for many years kept apart -- KMT policy in the glory days was never to permit local factions to form large-scale regional and national relationships.

Antonio Chiang, the editor of Apple Daily, speculated in his paper that the new municipalities will lead to the development of new fiefdoms and new power bases. The new mayoralities are powerful positions -- recall that in the ROC administrative system, the municipalities are equal to provinces in their clout and their mayors are like governors of provinces. Chen Chu has already lead the way with independent diplomacy in her visit to China. Who will follow, and how?

ADDED: The rabidly pro-China WantChinaTimes says scholars in China are unimpressed by KMT performance:

Chinese scholars see the overall result of Taiwan's municipal elections as a victory for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) although the ruling Kuomintang (KMT) won three seats out of the total of five.

"Because the DPP won more popular votes than KMT (approximately 3.42 million vs. 3.09 million), the KMT lost in the end," commented Wang Jian-min, research fellow with the Institute of Taiwan Studies under Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, arguing that the election result might lead to a slight revision in cross-strait policies to be more conservative.

Maybe Taiwan president Ma Ying-jeou has moved too fast in terms of his cross-strait policies, Wang said, suggesting that Ma's more liberal acts toward China such as the signing of ECFA could be the main reason for the failure.

Wait...people in China see the election as signaling a lack of support for Ma's China policies. What about the western media?

Luckily for those of us needing amusement after the disappointing election results, the international media is still reporting from its bubble where (1) not even a single sparrow can fall in Taiwan without it being a portent for the cross-strait relationship and (2) all events, irrespective of their nature, confirm that Taiwanese really really love Ma Ying-jeou's cross strait policies. Let us consider the BBC, which states that the election results "are seen as an endorsement of the KMT's push for warmer relations with China." The Beeb, whose reporting "many see" as pro-China, notes:

The BBC's Cindy Sui in Taipei says President Ma's pro-China policies have been controversial, but many see closer ties with China as necessary for the island's economic survival.[MT: Ma's ECFA agreement has never commanded majority support, as Cindy Sui noted in another BBC report, it is typically 40s-30s-30s for/against/no opinion.]

When the opposition DPP was in power, she says, tension between Taiwan and China ran high because the party favoured Taiwan's formal independence from China.[MT: China, of course, never causes tension. It has no agency nor ability to act on its own. Taiwan is the cause of all problems in the China-Taiwan relationship. Poor China, so put-upon by Taiwan's democracy. Also, the DPP does not favor formal independence "from China." The DPP favors independence, period and does not consider Taiwan part of China at present. In fact, it is the DPP's position that.... oh, never mind. I used to write the Beeb but soon found there was no point in it.]

.....

The DPP did improve its share of the vote compared to the presidential election results in the same constituencies in 2008 and analysts say the performance of party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen in losing in Xinbei may give her some momentum for a 2012 presidential nomination.[MT: "improve its share" I'll be charitable and assume the Beeb report came before all the numbers were in. Yet it is hard to see how the Beeb could know the DPP share grew without knowing it exceeded the KMT's.]

This should be highlighted: since Ma's ECFA agreement has never commanded majority support in Taiwan, how can this election in which the opposition got more votes overall be read as supporting Ma's China policies? Apparently, if you write for the international media, it's not a problem. [ADDED: Bloomberg made same claim: the results in which most voters preferred the opposition supports Ma's policies. And also VOA! What earth are they living on?]. AP turned in a much better report.... the two opening paragraphs:

Taiwan's ruling Nationalist Party won three out of five mayoral races Saturday, providing a boost for President Ma Ying-jeou's policy of improving relations with China ahead of the island's 2012 presidential poll.

But the main opposition Democratic Progressive Party, which wants to slow the process of reconciliation with the mainland, won about 50 percent of the overall mayoral vote, signaling that it will provide strong opposition to Ma's expected re-election bid — stronger by far than seemed possible only six months ago.

The slant is present -- what's going on is "reconciliation", China is "the mainland", Taiwan and China split in 1949 in AP's alternate universe. And of course, the election victories signal support for Ma's policies. That almost goes without saying. If the entire populace of Taiwan rose as one, drove to Taipei, had Ma drawn and quartered, burnt the ECFA agreement, and deported every Chinese citizen in Taiwan, somehow the international media would say that this showed support for Ma's China policies (I can see the headline now: "Taiwanese Express Anger at the Slow Pace of Mainland Reconciliation"). Nevertheless, despite the Establishment slant there is some excellent reporting in the AP piece. For example:

Acts of violence are uncommon in election campaigns in Taiwan, which began a gradual transition from a one-party dictatorship to vibrant democracy in the late 1980s. Violence by Taiwan's gangs is also limited, though they exercise considerable political influence, particularly on county governments.

How many international media pieces would include mention of the gangsterism at the local level? Kudos to AP. AP also took care to balance the "Harvard-educated Ma" with the "American and British-educated Tsai". Good work there too. The AP has a good focus on the emergence of Tsai and the DPP's growing strength for 2012, along with details on the DPP vote count:

The commission said the DPP's overall share of the mayoral vote stood at 49.9 percent, against 44.2 for the Nationalists and 5.9 percent for independents, compared to the 43 percent the DPP candidate garnered in the five constituencies in the 2008 presidential poll. Much credit for the comeback goes to party Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen, who while losing in Xinbei — by about five percentage points — now emerges as a credible candidate for the party's presidential nomination in 2012.

Overall, it is has a commendable conservative tone and gives many important details. One outrage in the AP piece lies here:

In contrast, the DPP wants to slow the pace of economic convergence across the 100-mile (160-kilometer) -wide Taiwan Strait and would likely close the door on political dialogue with China's Communist government.

The DPP has never closed the door on political dialogue with China's Communist government; it is always interested in dialogue with Beijing. This kind of dramatic statement is simplistic and misleading.

One unusual report was from the DPA. Note its summary in the lead:

Taiwan's China-friendly Nationalist Party KMT won local elections Saturday, but analysts said the narrow margin of victory should be a warning to it.

That short article contains no mention of the effect of the election on the KMT's China policies. Clearly these guys have no future in international reporting.

The irony is that the election, as far as the KMT's China policies are concerned, is absolutely meaningless -- Ma will carry them out, as he has repeatedly demonstrated, whether or not they have public support. No doubt he can spin the 3-2 victory as a boost for KMT policies, at least to outsiders, so to that extent the international media reporting is right. But the reality is that Ma's unpopular China policies are one of the major drivers of the DPP's rebound.

It's been a long, long election campaign. I've become mentally exhausted just following it, can't even imagine what it must be like to have been involved in the campaign. There are plenty of positives -- the DPP is back and in fighting trim. It has a number of strong politicians and is clearly able to run savvy, successful campaigns despite its lack of resources. The party is looking strong for 2012. Good luck to them.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums! Delenda est, baby.

Poll-looting

Polls out this week making the news. First, Ma's approval rating remains in the dumps (Taipei Times, KMT):

The poll, conducted by the Global Views Survey Research Center, put Ma’s popularity at 30.1 percent, down 0.9 percentage points from last month. His disapproval rating also dropped 1.4 percent to stand at 55.6 percent.

Ma's support rating has basically been orbiting 30%. It troughed back in March after the fracas over beef with the US at 23%. The elections in November have been the major media focus domestically, meaning that Ma is no longer making the news as much as he did before, especially now that ECFA is both passed and routinized.

Note that the approval rating for the legislators is just 19%. This won't stop the public from voting them back in en masse. After all, my legislator sent a bottle of wine and some flowers to my cousin A-Chen's wedding! And that's what's really important.

The interesting news is from Taichung. First, the miraculous thing is that the Taipei media has actually noticed Taichung for something other than a gangland execution. We are grateful for the attention. Second, it looks like incumbent Mayor Jason Hu is in a dogfight, at least according to a recent China Times poll, dated the 20th. Among likely voters in the November election for the mayor's post in the new Taichung Municipality, Hu is up just 40-34 over the DPP's Su, with 28% undecided. I've heard that KMT internal polls have the race even closer. However, 50% of respondents say they expect Hu to win, versus just 18% for Su.

Su has a couple of advantages over Hu. Incumbency actually means that Hu has a full-time job, meaning that he can't campaign during the day -- he has to work. According to a Liberty Times article the other day, Hu is in trouble with some of the local factions out in what is now Taichung county (which will become one with Taichung city to form the monstrous hybrid Taichung Municipality), who grumble that he hasn't given them enough attention, so they won't deliver him the votes they command. The article claims that Hu has done no campaigning out in the county yet. He is, however, omnipresent on local election signage out in the county. There is also the class issue between Hu and Su -- Su is a lot more sympatico with the county than Hu is. This may not necessarily hurt Hu as much as you might think, since many locals will see Hu as someone who is fit to be their leader by virtue of being a high-class gentleman.

At this point (disclaimer: two months to go!) the DPP looks like a lock in Kaohsiung, where even if somehow the KMT candidate and DPP turncoat Yang pool their support, incumbent DPP mayor Chen Chu will still win decisively. Tainan is similarly a foregone conclusion for the DPP. In Taipei the DPP's Su Tseng-cheng is mounting a strong campaign against unappealing KMT mayor, and looks like a winner. In Taichung Hu is still strong but the trend is against the KMT. Only in Taipei County does it look like the DPP is fighting an uphill battle. Good showing, guys.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Taipei Race Still Tight

As we batten down the hatches for typhoon Fanapi here on The Beautiful Isle, a China Times poll finds the DPP's Su slightly ahead of KMT Mayor Hau for the Nov election in that city. Hau has taken a beating from a steady drumbeat of DPP criticism of corruption in the city's procurement system. The Taipei Times reports:

Amid a string of procurement scandals related to the Taipei International Flora Exposition and the Xinsheng Overpass, Hau on Monday announced he had approved the resignation of his deputy mayor Lee Yong-ping (李永萍), adviser Chuang Wen-ssu (莊文思) and Chuang’s wife, Ren Shiao-chi (任孝琦), a secretary in Hau’s office.

The move came weeks after the city government was accused of buying flowers for the Taipei International Flora Expo and drainage piping for the Xinsheng Overpass at highly inflated prices. The city government’s slow response to the allegations only exacerbated the situation and hurt Hau’s image, costing him support in opinion polls less than three months before the election.

A poll conducted by the Chinese-language China Times suggested yesterday that Hau’s election opponent, Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) of the DPP, now enjoys a support rate of 41 percent, two percentage points ahead of Hau.

The poll is more interesting than that. The KMT news site has it. The China Times poll also asked people who they thought would win: Su over Hau 43-27 in that one. China Times also polled on The City Formerly Known As Taipei County. The KMT's Chu was up 42-38 over the DPP's Tsai, and when asked who they thought would win, voters gave the nod to Chu, 38.5 to 32.7. It's incredible that after the solid performance turned in by the DPP in many years of rule, and the dismal display of inepitude by the KMT's Chou Hsi-wei, the current magistrate, people would be thinking of voting KMT. But Chu cuts a solid technocratic figure. Apple Daily has him up a decisive eight points over Tsai.

Interestingly, the fact that both Chu and Hau are sons of powerful KMT politicians seems not to have any effect on the vote for them. Such nepotism appears to be thought natural by voters.

Voters are being wooed with promises of Enviro-leisure. For example, Eric Chu, the KMT candidate for The City Formerly Known As Taipei County, released his platform the other day. It's a nice mix of pork and middle-brow enviro-leisure:

Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Sinbei mayoral candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) yesterday pledged he would work to greatly expand the area covered by pathways and bicycle lanes, if elected in November, as part of his policy to develop tourism.

Just hours after he officially registered his candidacy with the Central Election Commission yesterday morning, Chu’s campaign office released a nine-point policy guide on tourism, the latest major policy announcement following earlier pledges to expand the MRT system and provide discounts to seniors.

In the five-page document, Chu said he would create new low-speed limit tourist roads in major scenic destinations along the coast and in areas including Danshui Township (淡水) and near Keelung. He added that, if elected, he would push for the construction of a 120km-long ocean-side bicycle path along the northern coastline.

A 120 km bike path would be awesome and I hope it happens. Chu's campaign focuses on increasing tourism -- many Taipei county destinations are already tourist meccas, such as Yingge (ceramics), Danshui (riverside), and Pinglin (tea). Chu wants to run spur lines into smaller tourist communities to bring in the masses -- an example of this are the short lines to Jiji in central Taiwan and to Neiwan (Hakka culture) in northern Taiwan. Chu also wants to build 80 kms of metro tracks in Taipei county. Hard to see how the budget for that would ever materialize....

The DPP's Su Tseng-chang in Taipei released a plan for Taipei the other day.

He proposed 10 strategies to make the capital greener, prettier and healthier, including constructing leafy boulevards, planning mid and long-term green infrastructure and constructing more “green corridors” connecting the city’s parks and MRT stations.

Su urged voters to let him win the Taipei mayoral election to counter the speculation that he was not committed to the November poll and was using the mayoral race as a springboard for a possible candidacy in the 2012 presidential election.

The proposals are aimed squarely at middle class independents, many of whom who vote the KMT by default, who can be swayed by appeals to modernity, leisure, and greening the built environment. At present Su enjoys a solid lead in that demographic. The basic strategy of the this triple appeal is the same as Chu's.

Take care of yourselves this weekend!
_____________
Daily Links:

• The shape of things to come: AU Optronics in LCD joint venture with some boys from Brazil. This is exactly what Taiwan should be doing.
• Barking Deer with news on treks.
• Michella goes paragliding in Luye, one of Taiwan's most beautiful places.
• In the wake of the rape of a high school student in a bathroom, the TRA is mulling cameras on trains.
• Government giving big bucks to young riders to promote environmentalism through biking. Go apply!
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Su passes Hau in TVBS poll

The latest TVBS poll has the numbers for Taipei city, where the DPP's Su is now ahead of the beleaguered KMT mayor Hau Lung-bin 45-42 with two months to go to the election on Nov 27.

In August Hau was up 45-42 over Su.

Note that in the current poll Su wins 47-24 among independents. Hau is slightly more popular with women (say what?). TVBS even breaks it out ethnically -- among Hoklos, Su is up 53-35, among Hakkas, Hau leads 48-41, and among mainlanders, Hau leads 69-21.

Another key stat: among voters in the 2006 mayor election, Su wins 96% of the DPP votes AND 26% of the KMT vote. Recall that Hau's vote total in 2006 was only 4,000 more than the highest DPP vote total, in 1998 for Chen Shui-bian (against Ma). 63% of the KMT voters will vote again for Hau, while 10% of that KMT electorate remains undecided.

Asked who would make the better mayor, voters pick Su 47-30 with 23% undecided.
____________________
Daily Links

• DPP candidate Su Chia-chuan meeting in Taichung and other Su videos.
  
• Time on doing business in China. Did you know the EU exports more to Switzerland than to China? Isn't it great that we have ECFA with a nation that practices state capitalism for the benefit of CCP princelings and their lackeys?
• Couples marry in mass wedding at 9:09 on 9/9/99.
  
• It's a good thing the US has decided to let China bankrupt itself with wasted spending on useless renewable energy technology, instead of smartly investing in a short, victorious war in Afghanistan like our wise American leaders.
• Not Taiwan: Pakistan: perhaps the worst floods in recorded history ignored by the media and by America, says Juan Cole. At DKOS an excellent post on the Pakistan floods with extensive satellite imagery of the now-massive Indus, which has cut a new course and created a gigantic lake.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Flower Show Blues Impact Taipei Mayoral election

Up in Taipei the KMT Hau Administration, in a brutal election battle with the DPP over the mayorship, is taking a beating over the international flower expo in Taipei. The Taipei Times notes:

Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) made his first response on Tuesday by revealing the prices of flowers used and saying that the city’s Department of New Construction paid about two times the market price for the flowers. However, Hau defended the incident as merely “administrative negligence” from civil officials, and slammed the DPP for politicizing the issue.

The Hau team’s failure to offer a clear explanation of the matter and thoroughly review the purchase plan presented the DPP with opportunities to issue more attacks, digging out more information to accuse the city government of paying up to 30 times the market price for flowers and turning the incident into a threat to Hau’s re-election bid in November’s special municipality elections.

“The civil servants who oversaw the purchase plans were either blind, or took kickbacks to have paid such ridiculously high prices for flowers. However, I think what’s more ridiculous is the city government’s slow and sloppy responses to the issue,” People First Party Taipei City Councilor Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) said.

These issues are hurting Hau at the polls. Apple Daily has Su Tseng-chang (DPP) up over Hau (KMT) 45-43, while TVBS has Hau up 51-49. TVBS notoriously underestimates pan-Green votes in its polls -- I'd argue that at this point Su is beating Hau. Hau also took a hit when it was revealed that water pipes for an overpass were purchased at several times the market price. The city government further muddied the waters when it said that the high-priced flowers were purchased for the overpass, not the expo.

The Flower Expo, which is slated to open on Nov 6 just ahead of the Nov 27 election, has a US$300 million budget. The Hau Administration had hoped to use the exhibition to gain leverage in the election, but it appears that just the opposite has happened. As the Taipei Times noted in an editorial:

Something smells in Taipei — and it’s not the 25 million flowers and plants purchased to decorate the city for the upcoming flora expo. Rather, it is Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) scrambling to explain why the city paid 30 times market price for the greenery to a contractor with ties to his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) administration. In recent days, investigators have also uncovered what appears to be the overpricing of building materials. It is ironic that Hau initiated the multi-billion-dollar project to boost his re-election bid in November.

The Flower Expo is the latest in very long string of failures that have occurred in Taipei under the Hau Administration. The Hau Adminstration, and Hau himself, are so lackluster that in rabidly Blue Taipei Hau is vulnerable. This public fail is on top of the very public failures like the Neihu metro line and the gondola project, and takes place amid long-term public frustration over rising housing prices in Taipei, now out of reach for most middle class Taiwanese. It is no wonder that, as a taxi driver put it the other day, there may be a change in the weather in Taipei come november.
_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

Su to run for Taipei mayor in December

Su speaks at a DPP rally in 2008 (post with more pics).

It pretty much became official today that former Premier Su Tseng-chang, the popular DPP politician, will run for mayor of Taipei at the end of the year. The formal nominating process remains to be completed, though it is all but certain Su will be the man. Su is widely considered the only DPP politician popular enough in the north to compete for either the Presidency, the mayoralty of Taipei, or the mayoralty of the new municipality, New North City (Xinbei), which comes into existence at the beginning of next year. Hence, there had been much media speculation about which post he would pick. If he wins the Taipei mayor election, he will be mayor, but it is generally held that Taipei is Blue and he will likely lose, leaving him free to run for president in 2012, and still keeping him in the public eye for months during the Taipei City election season.

I don't approve of this move at all. I had been hoping they would save Su to stump for the candidates in the two municipalities, and run him against Ma in 2012. It is absolutely imperative to defeat Ma in 2012. The municipalities are important, but Ma must go.

Below I've collected the vote counts for the mayor elections in 1994, 1998, 2002, and 2006.

2006
KMT 692,085 (53.81)
DPP 525,869 (40.89)
Other 68,135 ( 5.30)

2002
KMT 873102 (64.1)
DPP 488811 (35.9)

1998
KMT 766377 (51.1)
DPP 688072 (45.9)

1994
KMT 364618 (25.9)
DPP 615090 (43.7)
New 424905 (30.2)

Turnout was 64% in the most recent election, it had been around 70% previously. The current mayor, Hau, is lackluster and does not bring out Blue voters like Ma Ying-jeou did.

As you can see, the Blue vote typically runs 51-55% of the total vote, except for the anomalous 2002 election when Ma won a crushing victory. The DPP typically gets 40-45%. This means that if 5% of the votes shift from the KMT to the DPP, the DPP has a good shot at a win. If 10% of the Blue vote stays home, the DPP will win -- and Blue voters are staying home in droves at present. If the logic of this move is to keep Su in the game for 2012, then it is a gambling on the whim of 5% of the electorate.

Another way to look at is look at the DPP vote peak in 1998 -- 688K, and the KMT vote last time around, 692K. That is a difference of just 4,000 votes. Hau Lung-bin, the current mayor and probable candidate, lacks the popularity Ma enjoyed, and there is no reason at present to think we will see a significant gain in KMT voters for this election. If Su reaches the DPP high, and the KMT performance is lackluster, just a couple of thousand voters have to switch to make Su the mayor. And the DPP has been doing well lately.....
_______
Daily Links

• Manny Ramirez and the Dodgers coming to Taiwan this month
• Taiwanese-American.org talks to the lovely and talented Janet Hsieh, the host of the Discovery Channel's Fun Taiwan show.
• After FTA with China, Indonesia suddenly discovers its industries are being crushed and wants to renegotiate. But don't worry, the ECFA cargo cult will grind on regardless. If we just sign ECFA, there will be a chicken in every garage and a car in every pothole. Or something. Whatever.
  
• Apple Daily editorializes on gangster interference in city council elections.
• What? China totally hypocritical on its island claims? Who could have imagined it?
• The CNA translates several local editorials on the government's decision to halt land sales in Taipei city in a bid to bring housing prices down.
  

_______________________
[Taiwan] Don't miss the comments below! And check out my blog and its sidebars for events, links to previous posts and picture posts, and scores of links to other Taiwan blogs and forums!

ROC Judiciary Blasted: Day of Democracy Commentary

To accomplish this, we can rely on the Constitution to protect human rights, uphold law and order, make justice independent and impartial, and breathe new life into civil society. Taiwan's democracy should not be marred by illegal eavesdropping, arbitrary justice, and political interference in the media or electoral institutions. All of us share this vision for the next phase of political reform. -- President Ma, inaugural speech

Today saw a wonderful concatenation of pieces across Asia on human rights and democracy in the region. Yesterday Jon Adams had a great piece in the Christian Science Monitor on the Charter '08 signatories and how worried the Communist Party is about them. Today it was picked up by blogs and aggregators all over Asia, like the popular blog Peking Duck, with over 300,000 Chinese websites linking to it. Those Charter '08 guys! I wish they'd stop provoking China....

The Taipei Times published two diametrically opposed pieces today on justice here in Taiwan. The first was a letter from the Ministry of Justice in response, the latest in an exchange of letters between a group of prominent foreign Taiwan experts and observers and the Ministry that began with the recent arrests and detentions of prominent DPP politicians. Wang Ching-feng, the current Minister of Justice, is a strong supporter of the nutcase theory that Chen had himself shot in 2004 and convener of the 319 commission that investigated it with that in mind. The reader is invited to consider how non-partisan Wang can be in the Chen case. As if in reply to Wang, the Taipei Times also hosted a commentary by Su Tseng-chang, the 2008 DPP Veep candidate, who way back when, was a human rights lawyer defending the Kaohsiung 8. Both should be read.

The KMT has been conducting a private PR campaign aimed at the signatories of the letter and prominent critics of the erosion of democracy here. When foreigners speak, they can strike fear into the government here.

That is why the real highlight of the day's pieces is Jerome Cohen's stunning rebuke to Taiwan's judiciary, delivered in this morning's South China Morning Post. Look at that awesome second paragraph there:

When analysing the experience of the US Supreme Court, the late Charles Evans Hughes (chief justice 1930-39) commented: "The gravest wounds are self-inflicted." Taiwan's courts should reflect on that wisdom. The prosecution of former president Chen Shui-bian has not even come to trial. Yet his judges have already bungled the historic opportunity Chen's case presents for the judiciary to confirm its independence, impartiality and competence.

The vibrant democracy for which so many in Taiwan have struggled is in trouble. Corruption threatens the integrity of the political system. This cancer cannot be controlled without a credible, fair and transparent judicial system to enforce the law.

Cohen is a member of the Establishment think tank the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which has strongly supported the "peace process" between Taiwan and China, and Ma Ying-jeou. It appears to hew to the Establishment view that China will become a tractable member of the international system under US leadership, and that Taiwan is an irritant that provokes China. More importantly, however, Jerome Cohen is President Ma Ying-jeou's mentor from law school.

Damning.

Cohen discusses the removal of judge Chou (whom both Su and Cohen note presided over a court that specialized in financial cases) and his replacement by Judge Tsai. He also searches for a way to restore the judicial system's lost integrity.

There are only two things to be said: first, a hearty thanks to Cohen for this devastating, timely and expert piece. Hopefully it will lead to change here.

I am not going to say the other thing. Prodigal son and all that. Cohen's piece is below. Enjoy!

+++++++++++

Chen Judges Bungle Their Chance
Jerome Cohen
Jan 08, 2009

When analysing the experience of the US Supreme Court, the late Charles Evans Hughes (chief justice 1930-39) commented: "The gravest wounds are self-inflicted." Taiwan's courts should reflect on that wisdom. The prosecution of former president Chen Shui-bian has not even come to trial. Yet his judges have already bungled the historic opportunity Chen's case presents for the judiciary to confirm its independence, impartiality and competence.

The vibrant democracy for which so many in Taiwan have struggled is in trouble. Corruption threatens the integrity of the political system. This cancer cannot be controlled without a credible, fair and transparent judicial system to enforce the law.

Following Chen's November 11 arrest, despite the deep political divisions and partisan suspicions of Taiwanese society, the prosecution's detailed allegations of massive corruption by Chen, his family and colleagues had prepared the public to accept the prospect of their guilt and punishment.

Their convictions after proceedings perceived to be fair would vindicate the values of clean government, deter potential wrongdoers and heighten confidence in courts that began to free themselves from decades of authoritarian Kuomintang government fewer than 20 years ago.

Unfortunately, recent court proceedings have mocked that promise. Unless some unexpected, bold action restores public confidence, convictions of Chen and his associates will enhance popular cynicism and deny the courts the broad support required by any successful judiciary.

What happened? Chinese have traditionally emphasised substantive criminal law - guilt or innocence - rather than procedure. Yet, recent events, reflecting Taiwan's gradual transition from an inquisitorial to an adversarial system, focused attention on two related sets of criminal process issues: pre-trial detention and the merger of separate prosecutions.

The battle between Taipei District Court Judge Chou Chan-chun's three-judge panel - which twice took the unusual step of ordering Chen's release without bail, pending trial - and Taiwan's High Court - which twice reversed that decision - only ended when the case against the Chen group, originally assigned by lot to Judge Chou's panel, was merged into the earlier prosecution of Chen's wife for embezzling special state funds. That case is being handled by Judge Tsai Shou-hsun's panel.

The transfer made it possible for Judge Tsai to preside over Chen's third post-indictment detention hearing. His panel ordered Chen's return to detention, in a decision that contradicted the spirit of the Council of Grand Justices' Interpretation No653, issued several days earlier. The interpretation eloquently emphasised that the criminally accused should only be detained when no other measures suffice. Although this time Chen is not being handcuffed and held incommunicado, as he was for 32 days before indictment, any conversations with visiting family and even his lawyers can be monitored and used as evidence against him, and them!

Detained defendants are obviously hampered in preparing their defence in other ways, such as by discussing the case with co-defendants and witnesses, which was one of the prosecution's two main fears if Chen remained free pending trial. The other is that, if released, Chen might flee Taiwan. Judge Tsai could have released Chen under high bail and residential restrictions that made flight unlikely. Chen's incentive to flee will increase if he is convicted at trial. Does this mean he will continue to be detained if he appeals against any conviction? This would mean incarceration for years before final conviction.

At what point does the presumption of innocence become meaningless and pre-conviction detention morph into punishment for a crime not finally proved?

The dilemmas of a defendant's detention before final conviction plague every country. More distinctive to Taiwan are the unresolved mysteries surrounding the recent merger of the Chen group's case into the embezzlement case brought against his wife in 2006 - a time when Chen, although involved, still enjoyed presidential immunity from prosecution.

If such a merger was necessary, why was it not effected when the indictment against the Chen group was issued? Instead, the district court decided that the new indictment, which featured money-laundering and other complex charges - plus the earlier embezzlement charge against Chen - should be assigned to a separate judicial panel by lottery.

The lottery was limited to the few panels deemed more specialised than Judge Tsai's for dealing with complex financial transactions. How, then, can the court justify the subsequent assignment to Judge Tsai? Can the random assignment of cases essential to judicial neutrality be so easily circumvented?

According to the court's official press releases, assignment to Judge Tsai by the court's merger review panel followed court rules. Yet that review process could only be initiated by request of the judge in charge of the later case. Why did Judge Chou make that request? Was he pressured to do so? Why did the review panel not accept his proposal to transfer to Judge Tsai only that part of the group indictment relating to the embezzlement case against Chen and his wife, leaving the more complex accusations to Judge Chou's panel, as the court originally intended? Why did the review panel consist of merely five of the relevant criminal division chiefs? Why did the merger issue only become salient after the second time Judge Chou ordered Chen's release? Was this entire non-transparent process the court's response to angry public criticism of Judge Chou? Did any politician intimidate the court with secret threats?

Answers to such questions will eventually emerge. More immediately, is there any way to guarantee the Chen group and the public a judicial process that will have both the appearance and the reality of justice? Why doesn't Judge Tsai, who reportedly did not want to take on the new case, withdraw from handling all but the earlier embezzlement charges against the Chens? Then the district court can return to its original intent and again select by lot a judicial panel of financial specialists to deal with the complex accusations of the new case.

The new panel might even approve another application for Chen's release pending trial, with high bail and strict residential restrictions. Then both trials could proceed with broad public support. Justice, as the saying goes, must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done. That is the price of judicial legitimacy.

Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations

+++++++++++

SPECIAL TO ESWN: Popular Asian blogger Roland Soong at ESWN, who holds both Taiwan and its democracy in complete contempt, claimed that AP had published a "hit piece on Ma Ying-jeou" the other day.

Gosh Roland... think the piece today in SCMP by Jerome Cohen, Ma's mentor, is a hit piece too? Think Amnesty's complaints about excessive policy force were a hit piece too? What of Freedom House's call for an independent inquiry into the clashes here? How about Reporters without Borders and the International Federation of Journalists criticizing the President for failing to protect media freedom here? Think John Manthorpe and Jerome Cohen, were writing hit pieces when they were critical of the government on the detentions of DPP politicians? Was Julian Baum's recent writing in FEER a mere hit piece? How about the worry expressed by a Federation of more than 150 human rights organizations worldwide? The irony of ESWN's Soong enthusiastically putting up links to Glenn Greenwald's hard-hitting pieces on the erosion of democracy in the US under the Bush Administration, while simultaneously cheerleading the anti-democracy side in Taiwan's politics, would be high comedy if it were not such a low, needless, retrograde tragedy.

UPDATE: China Times has Cohen in Chinese.

[Taiwan]

DPP Chairman Discussions

Sign of the rising price of metal: One of my neighbors is an artist who works in various metals. This weekend he surprised a thief attempting to make off with some metal which he had kept as parts for his work. The thief had stolen one basket and was surprised when he came back for another. The first basket was not recovered, alas.

Speaking of rusty old parts, the DPP continues to discuss the direction of the party, which might be made into a Hollywood sequel entitled Any Which Way But Forward. Yesterday the Chinese language papers were speculating that Frank Hsieh, the failed presidential candidate and caretaker chairman until May, was seeking to ensure the position for Lee Ying-yuan. Lee may or may not make a good chairman -- the last time he got elected to anything was 1998, as Feiren pointed out when I asked him about it -- but the key issue is that Hsieh wants Lee because Lee is his close friend -- not because Lee is a veteran political strategist, can communicate well with the foreign media, has experience in party operations, is a good coalition builder, or any other particular quality important to a Chairman at this critical moment in the party's history. They say defeat is a great teacher, but even in politics, good teachers still require good students....

The Taipei Times had a couple of articles on the DPP chairman search today. The first said that Su Tseng-chang, Frank Hsieh's vice presidential candidate, denied he was interested in becoming chairman:

Former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) dismissed media speculation yesterday that he would run in the election for party chairman in May.

Su was not the only senior party member to show a lack of interest in running for the position. Others whom media had speculated could be interested in the position but who rebuffed the rumors include Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) and former DPP chairman Yu Shyi-kun.

Su told reporters outside his residence yesterday that he would not run in the race on May 25, nor would he strike alliances with any individual or faction within the party.

"The most important thing at the moment is to respond to the people's [wishes] and learn from them," he said. "We should not be concerned with fighting for positions. I don't think Taiwanese want to see that."

The party's charter stipulates that the head of state should lead the party when it is in power and that party members should directly elect the chairman when it is in the opposition.

It should be noted that Su might be playing coy, waiting for that "invitation." Remember when Ma Ying-jeou was out of politics and had to be "begged" by his father to re-enter and run for Taipei mayor?

It's a measure of how screwed up the DPP is that when it needs a wholesale reconstruction that people are mentioning Annette Lu or Yu Shyi-kun. The article observes that it is in the DPP charter that when the party controls the head of state, the head of state must be the Chairman. That curse is a practice the DPP picked up from the KMT, and shows how one of the DPP's problems is that its only real model for how to be a political party is the KMT. Like an abused child, the DPP in adulthood simply recapitulates the errors it was taught when young....

A second report is a CNA report on the DPP's internal reform process, quite brief. I quote the relevant portions:

DPP legislative whip William Lai (賴清德) said the caucus had started work on creating an ad hoc group that would push for structural reform within the party and serve as a platform to ensure a smooth process.

Over the next week the caucus will solicit the opinion of its members, other DPP members, party supporters and the public on the reform plans and a proposal could be drafted before the next DPP caucus meeting scheduled for April 11, Lai said.

During a DPP caucus meeting on Friday, DPP Legislator Pan Meng-an (潘孟安) said in a written statement that the party should revert to the basic political line that defined it before it came to power, Lai said.

DPP Legislator Yeh Yi-jin (葉宜津) said the DPP should address the problem posed by figurehead party members and consider building a system to regularly recruit and nurture party members, Lai said.

"Figurehead party members" referred to above would appear to be party members kept by local factions affiliated with the DPP for the purpose of vote buying (sometimes known as nominal party members -- 人頭黨員). More importantly, the DPP legislator observes that the DPP ought to consider building a system for recruiting and nurturing party members.

Yes, you read that right. At the moment, the DPP does not have a party machine that scoops up people, especially young people, and brings them into the party. The KMT has many avenues, from the China Youth Corps to the farm, fishing, and irrigation associations, to informal social groupings such as clubs and other associations. The KMT's Leninist background gives it a huge advantage in mobilization over the DPP.

What we need, in a nutshell, is a Chairman who is a professional without personal interest in high position, with excellent organizational and coalition building skills, who can communicate in English effectively with the foreign media, and so on. What we don't need is someone's buddy, or someone selected because they are ideologically pure....

[Taiwan]

Hsieh Picks Su

The China Post and other papers are reporting that Hsieh is going to ask Su to be his running mate.

Presidential candidate Frank Hsieh of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) said yesterday in Singapore that he has invited former Premier Su Tseng-chang to be his running mate in the 2008 presidential race.

Hsieh, who is currently visiting Singapore and is slated to return to Taipei on Aug. 15 to announce his choice of running mate, said that since he returned from a U.S. visit in July, he has asked Su to run for the vice president in the election scheduled for March 22, 2008.

"I have visited his family and have sent text messages inviting him to serve as my deputy," Hsieh told a press conference.

"But so far, he (Su) has yet to say yes or no. I'm still waiting for his answer," Hsieh continued.

Hsieh reiterated that if Su agrees, he is positive that the DPP will field a Hsieh-Su ticket for Taiwan's hotly-contested 2008 presidential race.

A Hsieh-Su ticket would be a pairing of champions. Indeed, Su is almost wasted on such a ticket.

[Taiwan] [Frank Hsieh] [media] [Su Tseng-chang]

Excellent Backgrounder on Frank Hsieh

Taiwan political commentator Ting-I Tsai has an excellent article on Frank Hsieh in the Asia Times Online:

The turning point for Hsieh came when he succeeded in persuading accused rapist and kidnapper Chen Jin-hsing, who was involved in the abduction of the family of then-South African military attache McGill Alexander in suburban Taipei, to surrender in 1997.

In January 2006, Hsieh's seemingly smooth political career tumbled again when President Chen apparently forced him to resign from the post of prime minister after the DPP's defeat in local commissioner and mayoral elections. His 10 months in the post were too short for Hsieh to prove his capability of leading the cabinet.

But based on his numerous disagreements with Chen and the DPP, he is ready to distinguish himself from the party's poor governance in the past seven years, according to his former aide and incumbent legislator Kuan Bi-ling.

After spending months at Harvard University, at the DPP's urging, Hsieh agreed to make a run for the 2006 Taipei mayoral election, though a victory for the DPP was considered slim.

In the campaign, he vowed to make culture, disadvantaged minorities, the environment, and Taiwan his priorities. Also, he planned to initiate a bid for the 2020 Summer Olympic Games as a way to upgrade the city's infrastructure. He managed his own campaign and explicitly declined Chen's assistance.

"His campaign manager didn't have to think of anything other than take assignments, for every detail was in Hsieh's brain," said a DPP politician, who declined to be identified.

Hsieh is obviously an excellent choice for Presidential candidate. The major debate now is over his choice of Veep. Yesterday a representative from 50 Hakka groups called for the DPP to pick Yeh, who is a Hakka.

[Taiwan] [2008 Presidential Election] [DPP] [Su Tseng-chang] [Frank Hsieh]

Chutzpocrisy and the Taiwan media

Ya gotta love the chutzpah and hypocrisy of the Taiwan media. The other day ESWN translated a piece from the pro-KMT China Times on the DPP primary polling....

Some background. The Pan-Blue (KMT + PFP) world is the world where conspiracy thinking passes for analysis, where Chen Shui-bian won the 2004 election because of an assassination attempt on him the night before, arranged by Chen himself; where Chen Chu won the Kaohsiung election because of accusations of vote buying that broke the night before; and now, we're going to hear about how Frank Hsieh won the DPP primary because the DPP primary vote was rigged. The China Times' "expose" has to be understood against that background. Such thinking is pre-industrial thinking, where the world is a place Where There Are No Accidents and Everything Happens Because Someone Arranged It That Way. When I was in the Peace Corps I used to get this from my Kenyan colleagues -- I was clearly a CIA agent, and everyone knows that the CIA arranges all events in the world to its liking.....

The China Times wrote of the survey of the population which formed a portion of the DPP primary data:

Suppose this was a general population survey of the entire adult population. It is general knowledge throughout the world that telephone surveys experience differential response by population sub-groups. For example, young people are less likely to be at home to take and coooperate with telephone calls; poor people are less likely to have telephones; etc. The differential responses rates will show up by monitoring the demographic distribution of the sample compared to the population (according to the census). For example, the sample shows 8% male 18-29 but the census says 10%. Usually, the sampling statistician would weight the sample. For example, each male 18-29 is now worth 10/8 = 1.25 persons and so on. This is accepted practice around the world.

In the DPP primary election, there is a wrinkle. Instead of surveying the general population, the DPP is filtering out the pan-blues (those who identify with the Nationalist and People First Parties). That is their prerogative. But they have to deal with the statistical consequences.

As a survey sample, this one will experience differential response rates like any other survey sample. Therefore, they should weight the sample to correct the biases. But to what values? In the general population, the percent of male 18-29 might be 10%. But what is the percent in the sub-population with the pan-blues being filtered out? The government census does not enumerate this. The percent of male 18-29 could be 8%, or 12%, or whatever.

So now there is a dilemma. If they don't weight, they are accepting the biases from the differential response rates; if they weight (for example, to the distribution in the general population as a whole), they may be introducing a different sort of bias. There is no clear correct answer here. The numbers can be produced as weighted or unweighted, and they will be different. Whichever number is chosen, it will be different from the other one. So someone is going to gain and someone else is going to lose as a result. This will be a point of contention. But the rules should be spelled out beforehand to remove the accusation that the choice was made post facto to favor certain candidates.

In other words, as the China Times hinted in that last sentence, the DPP screwed with the numbers to support favored candidates. Who that favored candidate would be is a bit mysterious, since the media here has been claiming that Chen Shui-bian supported Su and dislikes Hsieh, so why the all-powerful Chen, who can arrange assassination attempts to his own benefit (according to KMT mythology), can't arrange his own party's primary so Su would win it, is beyond me. But the really enjoyable thing about Conspiracy Thinking is that logical consistency is not a priority.

The chutzpocrisy here is really beyond the power of words to express. So instead, I'll supply you with that natural antidote to conspiracy thinking, numbers. Here are the numbers from the polls before the Kaohsiung mayoral election last year:

Liberty Times (12/5): Huang Jun-yin (34.38%) versus Chen Chu (34.09%)
China Times (12/4): Huang Jun-yin (43%) versus Chen Chu (29%)
TVBS (12/3-12/4): Huang Jun-yin (51%) versus Chen Chu (31%)
United Daily News (12/2): Huang Jun-yin (39%) versus Chen Chu (27%)
Era TV (11/26-11/27): Huang Jun-yin (41%) versus Chen Chu (26%)
ETTV (11/24): Huang Jun-yin (41%) versus Chen Chu (29%)

The pan-Blue media outlets (#2-6 on that list) all had Huang Jun-yin up by massive amounts, with the Chinese-owned TVBS taking pride of place at Chen Chu losing by 20 points. The China Times is there awarding Huang Jun-yin a 14% lead over Chen Chu.

The actual score? Chen Chu won by 1%. Thus, the polling experts at the China Times: Huang +14. Reality? Huang -1.

Yup. The China Times is certainly in a position to complain about weighting and survey results.

But let's revisit the logic of their primary claim, which is intended to support a sly conspiratorial insinuation:

So now there is a dilemma. If they don't weight, they are accepting the biases from the differential response rates; if they weight (for example, to the distribution in the general population as a whole), they may be introducing a different sort of bias. There is no clear correct answer here. The numbers can be produced as weighted or unweighted, and they will be different. Whichever number is chosen, it will be different from the other one. So someone is going to gain and someone else is going to lose as a result. This will be a point of contention. But the rules should be spelled out beforehand to remove the accusation that the choice was made post facto to favor certain candidates.

Read it carefully. First the China Times admits that whether you weight or not, you introduce bias into the poll. Quite true. But had the DPP weighted the responses from the sample, the weights would almost certainly have been arbitrary, and based on some other poll or social science research whose results were themselves weighted in ways that are not very solid (what level and type of belief makes one a Blue? What definition of Blue is acceptable to all viewing the poll?). Whenever one defines a sample and a methodology, one runs into the problem of arguable definitions. The China Times mentioned this to kick up dust, and make it seem like there is a problem, so as to support their underhanded claim: the DPP primary is actually a conspiracy. Merely claiming Bias in the poll! is easy; all polls have bias to some extent. What the China Times would have to demonstrate is that the bias affected the results -- which it cannot do because it does not have reliable alternative numbers. In fact, the China Times is probably incapable of producing such numbers, as its performance in recent elections here shows. The discussion here is simply the analytical equivalent of white noise.

Having kicked up dust and cast doubt, the China Times then claims that the rules should be spelled out beforehand. But this is a bit of disingenuous nonsense, since the rules were spelled out beforehand: the poll wasn't weighted and every candidate knew it. All candidates faced the same poll and from that perspective, the poll was perfectly fair. The China Times is simply hoping to cause discord in the Green camp, and feed its own readers' penchant for conspiratorial nonsense.

[Taiwan] [DPP] [KMT] [Su Tseng-chang] [Frank Hsieh] [media] [2008 Presidential Election]