DPP Election Loss: Analysis

Max Hirsch has a great piece in Kyodo News this week, analyzing the election defeat of the DPP. Hirsch has a very sensible contrast to the well-known blog Peking Duck, where Raj has served a series of KMT talking points presented as a "centrist" analysis. Hirsch notes:

On the surface, the DPP's huge loss is easily explainable: a string of corruption scandals surrounding Chen and other DPP officials; a lackluster economy; a gridlocked government; rocky relations with Washington and Beijing; and a loss of diplomatic allies and clout.

Behind the obvious, however, lies a baffling contradiction: Despite its ''worst-ever'' showing at parliamentary polls since becoming the ruling party, the DPP on Saturday actually hit a historic high in terms of its overall share of votes cast in a general election.

That's what I pointed out in the post below this one: the numbers won't support the theory that Chen chased away voters. Hirsch goes on to say:

The DPP reaped some 33 percent of the vote in the general election in 2000, the same year it displaced the KMT as the ruling party after its more than 50 years of one-party rule. In the 2004 general election, the DPP garnered nearly 36 percent of the vote after Chen had won another four-year term as president. Ironically, the DPP's performance Saturday in terms of vote share was its best yet, with its share climbing to somewhere between 37 and 38 percent, experts say. This rising trend points to electoral reform as a subtler and perhaps more important reason for the DPP's shocking loss.

The key point in the DPP loss -- which has hardly a landslide in raw voting -- was that the electoral reform that reduced the number of seats and created a winner take all format, which favored the party with the most money (Hirsch notes that the KMT outspent the DPP by 5-1, citing Taiwan expert Dafydd Fell of the U of London). This, combined with gerrymandering, meant that the DPP was at a massive disadvantage. As a Taipei Times analysis put it on Sunday:

The pan-blue camp won yesterday's legislative election by a wide margin as its main rival, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), failed to come up with effective strategies that could have helped it overcome the disadvantages it faced under the new electoral system, political analysts said yesterday.

Except for certain districts in the south, the structure of most electoral districts favors the pan-blue camp by a 55 to 44 ratio, said Chen Chao-jian (陳朝建), an assistant professor of public affairs at Ming Chuan University.

In a political economy where political identity is the most outstanding single factor, the structure of the districts was the key to KMT dominance that gave it 80% of the seats with only 60% of the vote. Thus, the number one dumb DPP decision was not its party platform but its decision to go along with the legislative "reform" that produced a one-party legislature that is actually less democratic than the "unreformed" version.

As always, let's look at the numbers. I have added the local elections held since 1998 to the list:

1998 County Magistrate/City Mayor elections
KMT 3.56 million + 0.22 million New Party
DPP 1.15 million

2001 Legislative election
Blue vote: 5,136,827
Green vote: 4,249,030

2002 County Magistrate/City Mayor elections
KMT 2.52 + 0.49 million PFP + 0.03 New Party
DPP 1.27 + 0.10 TSU

2004 Legislative election
Blue vote: 4,552,831
Green vote: 4,228,141

2005 County Magistrate/City Mayor elections
KMT 3.54 million + 0.35 PFP + 0.04 New Party
DPP 1.96 million + 0.20 TSU

2007 Legislative Election
KMT 5.0 million
DPP 3.6 million

You can see first of all that only in the highly anomalous 2004 legislative election has the total Green vote managed to reach near the total Blue. Indeed in that year the DPP vote exceeded the KMT vote 3.4 million to 3.1 million, with the PFP taking 1.3 million votes, and 600,000 Blue voters staying home. This made the DPP the single biggest party in the legislature. It is 2004, when all those Blue voters stayed home, not 2007, that cries out for explanation. In 2001 there were over 5 million Blue votes, just as there were in 2007 (however, the DPP exceeded the KMT 3.4 million to 2.9 million; the PFP took 1.9 million votes).

This suggests that another, hidden, absolutely vital component of KMT dominance was its ability to swallow the PFP (and the New Party) over the last couple of years and mobilize former PFP members, as well as its own people, to come out and vote for it. If the PFP were still a mighty force, the KMT might not have had a majority in many districts -- in '01 and '04 the PFP poached over a million votes from the KMT. KMT/Blue voters are far more aware of themselves as a group and an identity than Greens, and many analysts noted the feeling that the party could not concede Taiwan to the DPP. Party discipline was excellent, and in many districts the party made sure voters had transportation and so forth. The KMT cut deals with former PFP members and the two marched in lockstep to victory as the KMT gathered the Blue vote all to itself. The DPP, by contrast, still had to contend with the TSU which obstinately refused to give in and form a Green coalition.

Note that nary a peep was heard from KMT splittist James Soong, former Chairman of the People's First Party (PFP), as his party basically disappeared into the KMT. The silence from Soong was absolutely deafening. By contrast TSU spiritual head former President Lee Teng-hui was still out there campaigning against the DPP and complaining about Chen Shui-bian. That was just plain stupid from the standpoint of the island's long-term needs. Additionally, in some districts disgruntled DPP legislators ran against their own people. The DPP's lack of party discipline and its inability to manage its relations with the TSU hurt it (Hirsch reports that Lee is set to endorse Hsieh for the presidency).

In sum, the KMT/Blues got 5 million votes, about the same as in 2001 (suggesting a natural ceiling for KMT legislative election votes), and the DPP actually increased its totals, both percentage-wise and absolutely, from about 3.4 million to 3.6 million (the Taipei Times has a nice chart of the vote totals). The voting trends are very similar to historical trends, and any explanation that relies on the conventional wisdom of Blame Chen! will have to confront the fact, as Hirsch noted, that the DPP actually increased its vote from 2004. There is no evidence in the voting patterns that voters switched to the KMT from the DPP, that the KMT was able to increase the Blue vote, or that the DPP was impacted by any of the negative publicity in recent months. Competent survey work might find such evidence; but at the moment, no such work exists and all evidence is anecdotal. In the final analysis, this was a perfectly normal legislative election by raw vote counts, completely typical. But with the new, gerrymandered, winner take all districts, conventional just wasn't good enough.

The DPP's failure was the same as we have seen in previous elections: it cannot compete with the KMT's ability to mobilize Blue voters. For better or worse, even though the legislature is far more important than the ROC's weak presidency, Green voters seem to be less interested in getting out there and voting for the DPP at the local level. The DPP is going to have to make some significant investments in the nitty-gritty of voter education and voter mobilization, because in the last three legislative elections it has received 3.4, 3.4, and 3.6 million votes -- which suggests that there is a kind of structural ceiling built into the voting patterns that probably has very little to do with the ebb and flow of campaign rhetoric.

It would be nice if we could say that the modest rise in DPP voters meant something for the future, but to compete with the KMT, the DPP would have to be able to get 5 million people out there to vote for it at the local level. It has never even come close to such a figure in a local election. In the Presidential election of 2004 6.4 million people voted Green, and 6.4 million voted Blue. That probably represents the upper bound of people willing to come out and vote in Taiwan. If we replay the 2000 presidential election this year, as we have replayed the 2001 legislative elections, the Blues took 7.58 million votes, Chen Shui-bian, 4.97 million votes (source), for about 12.6 million votes cast, which suggests that the Presidential pool is about 12.6-8 million votes, meaning that in the next 70 days the DPP will have to mobilize 6.4 million voters, again. If the Blame Chen! theorists are right, maybe we'll see a return to the 2000 voting levels as swing voters either stay home or switch to Blue. Your guess is as good as mine.....

Implications for the future? I observed a couple of weeks ago that the DPP strategy in making Chen Shui-bian chair of the DPP was probably to permit the egg from this defeat to stick to the lame-duck Chen, and not land on Hsieh or any up-and-coming politician. In that scenario Hsieh then rides in to become DPP Chairman, as indeed he has, and then the DPP presidential campaign gets a big boost as Hsieh rides in on a white horse to save it. Unfortunately the debacle was so great that any boost Hsieh could have gotten has been swamped by KMT trumpeting of landslide! Like everyone, I await the DPP's strategy for climbing out of this hole -- yet also, note that despite the negatives, the DPP was still able to increase its vote -- whereas despite the negatives for the DPP, the KMT reached its previous ceiling. Does that auger well for the future? Perhaps....

Where the effects will be felt is at the local level. With the legislature to provide cover, local officials, who are 90% KMT, can now engage in election shenanigans with impunity -- one of the first acts of the new legislature, I suspect, will be to formally or informally pull the teeth of the Ministry of Justice and the Central Election Commission's investigative apparatus, which at the moment is looking at a historic high of 6,100 vote buying cases. Disclaimer: note that I am not saying that local officials WILL engage in shenanigans, I am only saying that they CAN. Of course, I would never assert, in a public forum, that anyone would actually engage in serious illegal election activity.

Apologies for the lack of blogging recently. It's finals week here -- one reason the student vote was apparently low -- and I am swamped. Couldn't the CEC have scheduled this election three weeks ago when people weren't so busy?

[Taiwan] [KMT] [DPP]

Some preliminary numbers

Let's start with the polls. Several people have written to say "Looks like those biased polls were right." ESWN has a post on it up on his widely read blog, so let's take a look at his data. ESWN observed:

But what were the public opinion polls saying? The following table is compiled from the list of polls conducted by TVBS one to three months before the elections. The entries show the percentages for the KMT candidate versus the DPP candidate; the green entries are those in which the DPP candidate is ahead. Before the actual election results in, poll results such as these are contemptuously dismissed as "pan-blue" polls.

District	TVBS Poll	Actual Result
Taipei City 1	57% vs. 26%	60% vs. 39%
Taipei City 2	51% vs. 27%	52% vs. 46%
Taipei City 3	51% vs. 25%	60% vs. 38%
Taipei City 4	50% vs. 27%	62% vs. 35%
Taipei City 5	44% vs. 26%	58% vs. 41%
Taipei City 6	59% vs. 24%	67% vs. 32%
Taipei City 7	60% vs. 19%	66% vs. 32%
Taipei City 8	55% vs. 19%	72% vs. 26%
Taipei County 1	49% vs. 21%	58% vs. 40%
Taipei County 2	31% vs. 24%	40% vs. 43%
Taipei County 3	47% vs. 29%	48% vs. 50%
Taipei County 4	46% vs. 30%	52% vs. 47%
Taipei County 5	45% vs. 33%	52% vs. 47%
Taipei County 6	51% vs. 28%	57% vs. 43%
Taipei County 7	51% vs. 24%	56% vs. 42%
Taipei County 8	47% vs. 31%	60% vs. 40%
Taipei County 10	52% vs. 23%	60% vs. 39%
Taipei County 12	45% vs. 17%	52% vs. 38%
Chiayi County 1	35% vs. 34%	58% vs. 42%
Chiayi County 2	26% vs. 41%	42% vs. 57%
Kaohsiung City 1	53% vs. 25%	58% vs. 41%
Kaohsiung City 2	43% vs. 33%	49% vs. 51%
Kaohsiung City 3	44% vs. 28%	49% vs. 43%
Kaohsiung City 4	43% vs. 29%	51% vs. 47%
Kaohsiung City 5	32% vs. 40%	46% vs. 52%
Tainan City 1	47% vs. 30%	50% vs. 50%
Tainan City 2	40% vs. 38%	48% vs. 50%
Tainan County 1	31% vs. 36%	45% vs. 55%
Tainan County 2	25% vs. 42%	41% vs. 59%
Tainan County 3	32% vs. 37%	47% vs. 53%

The problem with the pro-Blue polls like TVBS (100% owned by Hong Kong Chinese) is not that they are right or wrong in hindsight, it is that they cannot be trusted beforehand because they are pro-Blue and consistently underestimate Green votes. You only have to scan the list and look at the Green column for TVBS poll results and actual results. In almost every case, the poll underestimates the Green vote by 25-50%, sometimes even more. In Taipei county districts 4-12, for example, TVBS had:

Green vote:
District 4 projected: 30 actual: 47 disparity: 56%
District 5 projected: 33 actual: 47 disparity: 42%
District 6 projected: 28 actual: 43 disparity: 53%
District 7 projected: 24 actual: 42 disparity: 75%
etc.

The phenomenon of pro-Blue polls underestimating Green votes is well known here, and as you can see, TVBS sometimes errs by 50% in its estimates. Such polls are useless, except as propaganda tools -- which is why they exist, and why they can't be trusted.

Was it possible to predict this debacle? Yes, but not from looking at polling data in the Blue papers, which was worthless. Indeed, numerous ominous rumblings reached my ears last week, but I discounted them for the same reason that I discount polls from the Dark Side: the Green voters conceal their plans, as ESWN's data so eloquently shows. Perhaps the KMT and DPP internal polls showed something, but they weren't releasing their data. Nevertheless, there were people out there who foresaw disaster, though as far as I know, nobody picked the KMT to get over 80 seats.

Let's now look at the numbers from the last several legislative elections. I gathered them up last year for a post on US State Department official Tom Christensen's erroneous belief that the US kept the DPP from doing as well as expected in the Legislative elections in '04. Here are the figures:

2001
Blue Parties, total votes
KMT 2,949,371
PFP 1,917,836
New 269,620

Total Blue vote: 5,136,827

2001
Green parties total votes
DPP 3,447,740
TSU 801,560

Total Green Vote: 4,249,030
Total turnout (66%)

++++++++++++

2004
Blue Parties total votes
KMT 3,190,081
PFP 1,350,613
New 12,137

Total Blue Vote: 4,552,831

2004 Green parties total votes
DPP 3,471,429
TSU 756,712

Total Green votes: 4,228,141
(Total turnout 59%)

2001 Blue vote: 5,136,827
2004 Blue vote: 4,552,831

2001 Green vote: 4,249,030
2004 Green vote: 4,228,141

2001-2004 difference
Blue: - 583,996
Green: - 20,889

In other words, in '04 the DPP did well because Blue voters stayed home. The '08 totals are up on the CEC website:

Major parties, 2007 LY election, total votes (election held 1-12-08)

2008
KMT 5,010,801
DPP 3,610,106

Let's see that another way:

2001 Blue vote: 5,136,827
2004 Blue vote: 4,552,831
2008 Blue vote 5,010,801 (+ 0.38 million New Party) ~5.4 million

In other words, the Blues manage to raise their votes back to their 1998 levels of 5.3 million -- the most Blue votes in an LY election in a decade. Meanwhile, what about the DPP and the Greens?

2001 Green vote: 4,249,030
2004 Green vote: 4,228,141
2008 Green vote 3,610,106 (+.35 million TSU) ~4.0 million

There's going to be lots of temptation to criticize the DPP. What were the DPP's vote totals?

2001 DPP 3,447,740
2004 DPP 3,471,429
2008 DPP 3,610,106

Yes, you're not going blind. The DPP actually raised its vote total by 140,000 votes over 2004, despite the barrage of negative campaigning. Where did the Greens lose out? TSU votes plummeted, from 756,000 votes in 2004 to just 344,000 in 2008.

The short answer to today's election loss is really quite simple -- the KMT was effective in getting out absolutely everyone who would vote for it. The long answer is one I'll have up in a couple of days, when I digest what's being written and said about this disaster for Taiwan and its future.

UPDATE: the number I am using is the number for party ballots. Voters cast two ballots in this election, one for the candidate and one for the party. The party ballot figure is lower, so I figured it is more conservative. I haven't seen constituent numbers yet.

[Taiwan]

Not a post about the election, thank god: reservoirs

As I was contemplating another South Korea success vis-a-vis Taiwan -- South Korea inward FDI fell for the third straight year, whereas Taiwan's hit record levels last year (but don't worry, we can solve all our economic ills by imitating the South Korea economy) --and this one too, where S Korea's financial industry is well behind our financial industry -- my jaundiced, pro-Taiwan eye, always interested in water policy here, fell on this article on Taiwan's attempt to deal with water quality in its reservoirs....

...Taiwan plans to spend US$6 million on cleaning up its reservoirs:

The Environmental Protection Agency under the Executive Yuan will allocate NT$200 million (US$6.16 million) over the next four years for a eutrophication control project to improve the water quality at four reservoirs around Taiwan.

EPA officials said the project to clean up the Shimen, Feitsui, Tsengweng and Kinmen reservoirs will improve the quality of water supply for 10 million residents.

The project is being launched in line with a Water Resource Agency plan to conserve reservoir catchment areas.

The officials said that although the extent of eutrophication at Taiwan's three largest reservoirs has not reached the worst possible levels, the situation is not ideal. They noted that as the reservoirs supply water to almost half of Taiwan's population, the decision was made to deal with the problem comprehensively.

The problem is eutrophication, which destroys water quality as nutrients in the lake lead to algae blooms:

Eutrophication is a degradation process originating from the introduction of nutrients from agricultural run-off and untreated industrial and urban discharges. Impairment of water quality due to eutrophication can lead to health-related problems.

...

For example, Wei continued, the main causes of eutrophication at the Feitsui reservoir are run-off from fertilizers used upstream and bait discarded by people fishing in the reservoir.

This 2005 paper warns that the threat to the Feitsui Reservoir will require a 55% reduction in run-off:

Several NPS [non-point source] reduction schemes had been proposed for the watershed and were tested using this model to develop allocation strategies. The purpose of this study is to estimate the TP [total phosphorus] yield loading from the entire watershed to Fei-Tsui Reservoir such that an appropriate NPS pollution control strategy can be developed for managing the Reservoir. Results of this study show that a TP reduction of over 55% is necessary in order to prevent the onset of eutrophication in the Reservoir.

Meawhile the article shows that Taiwan's water management policies are sometimes both imaginative and environmentally sound:

He said that in addition to the Water Resource Agency and the Taipei Feitsui Reservoir Administration cooperating to eliminate the sources of eutrophication at the reservoir, the EPA will work with communities near the reservoir to build an artificial marsh system as well as a buffer zone between agricultural fields and water systems that flow into the reservoir.

As for the eutrophication problem at the Kinmen reservoir, Wei said the EPA plans to use a method that has proven successful at the Hsinshan reservoir in Keelung City, in which the EPA will introduce oysters and other bivalves in areas around the reservoir to feed on microalgae -- the main culprit behind eutrophication at the reservoir.

According to this Taipei Times article from last year, water quality is worst in a couple of Kaohsiung reservoirs:

The degree of pollution is measured using the Carlson Trophic State Index (CTSI), which assesses the eutrophication of a lake. Eutrophication occurs when nutrient levels in water increase too much, causing excess algal growth.

The enrichment of nutrients in an ecosystem and the cloudiness of the lake resulting from micro-biomass are all measured, Lu said.

Water transparency, total phosphorus levels, and chlorophyll a levels -- which indicate the density of phytoplankton -- also contribute to the index, he said.

CTSI is scaled from 0 to 110, with each 10 units indicating a doubling of algal biomass.

The Feng Shan Reservoir has a CTSI of over 70, the EPA said.

The Cheng Ching Hu Reservoir in Kaohsiung County's Niaosong Township (鳥松) is suffering similar pollution levels.

However the reservoir has seen gradual improvements over the years, with its CTSI dropping from a historic peak of 66 to 50 this June, Lu said.

"But citizens need not worry, since the water still needs to go through a water treatment plant before it runs into the taps at home," he said.

Shihmen Reservoir, Wu She Reservoir, Te Chi Reservoir and the Sun Moon Lake reservoir are among the country's cleanest reservoirs, the EPA said.

Twelve reservoirs received neutral scores, including Feitsui Reservoir, which provides drinking water to Taipei City.

One thing I learned in Kenya was to appreciate the importance of water and water policy....

[Taiwan]

Election Pics Again

The election is tomorrow, so I thought I'd inundate you with more election pictures, so everyone in the world can be overwhelmed with the sound and color of elections here in Taiwan.

One predominant myth that colors academic discourse on Taiwan, which I have frequently argued against, is that local voters prefer candidates who are not corrupt. I think this election will forever do that myth in. The middle class here does not want clean government -- it wants government that will assure the flow of funds from the center out to the electorate -- and clean government won't do that. The preference for corrupt candidates -- of which there are countless examples here in Taiwan -- also bodes ill for democratic development in China. Jim Mann has already argued in his recent book The China Fantasy that the middle class in China will ally itself with the authoritarian state to protect its privileges against urban and rural poor. Here is another incentive for them to keep the authoritarian state in being -- corruption helps sustain the political economy of local contracting and development that keeps local middle classes happy.

Feiren emailed me the following from FTV:

進入投票所依序會領四張票，分別是區域立委選票、不分區政黨選票，及兩張公投選票。公投選票，領了也可以不投，只要退給選務人員就好，但千萬別撕毀，或把選票帶出去，以免觸法。再次提醒您，立委合併公投選舉，投票時間1/12早上八點到下午四點，展現民主精神，別忽視你手中神聖的一票。
Each voter should collect 4 ballots: one for the local district legislative representative, one for legislator-at-large, and two referendum ballots. After picking up the referendum ballots, voters can choose not to cast them, but they must be returned to election officials. The ballots must not be torn-up or taken out of the polling station. Fines will apply to those who disobey. Voting for the legislative election and the two referendums will begin at 8am and close at 4pm in the afternoon. So bring your id, chop, and voting card to be sure that you will be able to exercise your right to vote, and don't forget to return the referendum ballots if you decide not to participate. (Feiren trans.)

Feiren observes that this will mean you will have to get back in line to return the ballot -- perhaps increasing the incentive to vote for the referendums -- if this report is true.

Everyone I've been listening to is saying the same thing -- the DPP will not do well. 40 seats only, by some sources.

The government is investigating a record number of vote buying cases.

The whole DPP brain trust backs this candidate.

Regardless of sex, candidates love to be seen in athletic poses. This year, because of the success of pitcher Wang Chien-ming with the Yankees, everyone is into baseball.

On a sunny Tainan street, a candidate looks down.

Because there is a limit on the amount of money that can be spent on a gift to a voter -- NT$30 -- most candidates hand out pens, notepads, and tissues.

Signs frequently overlook intersections.

One of the most annoying aspects of KMT success in this election is going to be another interminable load of crap from the Talking Heads inside the Beltway about (1) how the US influenced the election and (2) how Taiwan's independence movement is fading.

In many adverts for KMT candidates Ma and Siew, party affiliation is absent. The rhetoric is also Taiwan-centered.

Shelly Rigger has a good explanation of the changes in the legislature and the election in the WSJ this week.

Lee Teng-hui, please fold up the TSU and retire. Please.

Someone has scratched out their faces.

In Hell, the sound trucks run 24-7.

The DPP candidate in the center has the strong support of local KMT officials for getting the job done. Legislators are commonly involved in all sorts of local affairs -- even to the extent of getting calls from constituents if they get involved in a traffic accident.

Note how "China" is written in simplified Chinese.

One of the reasons election ads are so fascinating is that they are often juxtposed with ordinary ads, in quite striking and ironic ways.

Ma and Siew on the side of a bus. The color scheme is quite attractive. Note also the open necked shirts, in contrast to Hsieh and Su, who often appear in ties.

[Taiwan] [KMT] [DPP]

More Establishment Dreck from IHT: A Time for Moderation

Longtime China commentator Andrew Nathan and Yun-han Chu had an editorial in the International Herald Tribune on the upcoming election in Taiwan, under the now-familiar Establishment rubric of "moderation." Although writing like this is perfectly awful, it achieves its air of insight through deployment of restrained language that creates a moral equivalence between China and Taiwan. To wit:

Yet the most important result of the elections is all but predetermined: Taiwan's next president will be a relative moderate on cross-strait issues.

The key to this surprising development is a shift in the mood of Taiwan voters. Chen's efforts over the past eight years to open up more international space for Taiwan hardened Beijing's position while producing a loss of support for Taiwan in Washington. The economy went through a recession in 2001 and has not strongly recovered. A stream of corruption scandals engulfed high-ranking officials of the governing Democratic Progressive Party and the presidential family.

Note the pro-KMT slant of the opening frame -- Chen caused Washington to curb its support for Taipei -- even though, as former Cheney advisor pointed out here a few weeks ago, it is Washington's obsession with its defeat in Iraq that actually led to the fall-off in support for Taipei. Note also that it is Chen Shui-bian that caused Beijing's position to "harden" even though it was Beijing that refused to negotiate from the start -- even though the DPP has wanted negotiations for eight years. The article even echoes the KMT propaganda claim that the economy is bad, even though we have been growing strongly in recent years and are now the #2 exporter to China. In other words, this is a farrago of nonsense. I suppose it is pointless to observe that Chen was widely hailed as pragmatic and conciliatory when he came to power in 2000 and has remained a "moderate" -- only in the Cloud Cuckoo-land of writing on cross strait relations can a lifelong moderate who advocates peaceful democratic change like Chen Shui-bian be portrayed as a "radical." But heck -- why refer to the complexities of history when you can source ideas from the KMT so much more easily?

The article then presents the cross-strait policies of the two candidates Frank Hsieh and Ma Ying-jeou. Next, it opines:

Taiwan's shift toward moderation remains fragile. The next president will have to deal with a divided legislature and a politicized media. Consolidating the shift will require results early in the new term.

It's amazing that anyone could write "Taiwan's shift toward moderation remains fragile." Taiwan threatens no one. It carries out policy by peaceful means. It has done so since anyone can remember. And yet, pundits can write that our moderation is "fragile." At any moment, we could break out into.....what? A public referendum? An attempt to enter the WHO? The mind reels. For crissake we're a frickin' democracy here! We're moderate by definition.

Chu and Nathan finally point out that China is a problem too...in a whole entire sentence....

The last mainland-Taiwan accord was a 2006 agreement to allow certain kinds of charter flights to fly directly between the two sides, which sidestepped sovereignty issues by putting forward the two sides' airline associations as signers. Many similar ideas are on the shelf and afford opportunities to create momentum: ideas for scheduled direct flights, exchange of tourists, currency exchange, and direct cargo transfer through islands near to China that belong to Taiwan. Stronger gestures by Beijing could include a relaxation of its full-court press on the few remaining countries that still recognize Taipei; relaxation of opposition to Taiwanese membership in the World Health Assembly (associated with the WHO), relaxation of the ban on high-level Taiwan participation in APEC, and a slowdown or even freeze on the deployment of medium-range missiles pointed at Taiwan.

Such steps could begin to reverse a legacy of mistrust on all sides. Beijing and Washington must not waste this opportunity to put the triangular Taiwan Strait relationship on a path of declining tension.

Nathan and Chu's point of view shows the same relentless lack of imagination and understanding that haunts Establishment commentary on Taiwan. No recognition anywhere in this article that the major problem is not the lack of moderation in Taipei but the threats of aggression emanating from Beijing. Note that their radical plan for building trust is to "slowdown or even freeze" the missiles pointed at Taiwan -- not a condemnation of the threat of force followed by a call for their reduction and elimination. What -- we're supposed to build trust with a nation that is threatening us more slowly?

Finally, observe how the restrained language, as Orwell noted in his masterful essay on Politics and the English Language, serves as a kind of euphemism that covers up the deeply unethical position of Nathan and Chu (who lack even the moral cojones to call for the removal of the missiles threatening Taiwan). According to Chu and Nathan, there's a "legacy of mistrust" which exists "on all sides." Although it sounds balanced, it actually once again creates moral equivalence between perpetrator and victim. Mistrust exists because China wants to annex Taiwan and Taiwan does not want to be annexed, simple as that. If China did not threaten Taiwan there would be no issue; the two sides would be as friendly as Canada and the US. There is no "legacy of mistrust" "on all sides", because there are not two morally equivalent sides here.

UPDATE: I've roasted Chu's misleading, pro-KMT writing before on this blog. As blogger Feiren pointed out in a private email, Taiwan is not the problem in the negotiations -- Nathan and Chu fail to point out that it is China that has refused to do further negotiations on charter flights and tourism using non-official negotiating teams.

[Taiwan]

Fun with campaign volunteers

My wife drives up to our house on her motorcycle, and to her undying joy, is greeted by a campaign worker dressed in the regalia of our local DPP legislative candidate. Our neighborhood is getting blitzed almost daily with literature from the local KMT candidate, but we haven't seen anything from the DPP. The worker hands her some literature and asks:

"So, are you voting for the DPP on Saturday?"

"Of course! Thanks so much for the pamphlets!"

"So how come you're not voting for the KMT? They have good people too, you know."

That threw my wife for a loop, but she came back strong. "If they are good people, how come they're in the KMT?"

"You should vote KMT, don't you think the DPP has messed everything up?"

"The legislature was messed up by the KMT, not the DPP."

"A-ya." The worker exclaimed. "The DPP has ruled long enough. It's time to give the KMT a chance."

" Why should I give them another chance to hurt Taiwan even more? They're going to sell us out. Do you want to be part of China?"

"Why not? What's wrong with that?"

At this point my wife gave up and went in the house. Lots of dirty tricks this year. Tricks like this also show how, by canvassing in this manner, the KMT can find out the political affiliations of local voters.

[Taiwan]

How the Referendums Will Be Defeated

The pro-Green Liberty Times (Chinese) has been reporting on how the legislative election referendum is being beaten: at the local level.

Each neighborhood or precinct has a captain who is the local chief administrator, the li chang or the lin chang. The hierarchical administration of Taiwan society begins with them -- they handle neighborhood affairs, such as getting potholes or streetlights fixed. They are sensitive ears and eyes of the government in the neighborhoods. They are also about 90% KMT.

During election it is their job to distribute voter notification slips, which they have to present so they can vote. According to the law these notifications must be placed in voter hands, not left in mailboxes. In this election they are supposed to give one for the legislative election and one for the referendum. According to the Liberty Times report, in many districts voters are reporting that KMT precinct and neighborhood captains are simply refusing to distribute the referendum notification, without which voters cannot obtain a referendum ballot -- and thus can't vote for the referendum.

UPDATE: In the comments below people say you can still vote for the referendum without the notice, the idea is to make you think you can't vote for it. As STOP_MA points out, and we've noted before, the whole idea of two-ballot voting is to enable local KMT machines to know who votes DPP. It's basically undemocratic.

[Taiwan]

IMPORTANT: Shannon Meet up moved

Jerome warns the meet up has moved

++++++++++++

New location for our meeting for Breakfast Club on Jan. 12 at 10 am.

Shannon's is doing some redecorating and so will not be open; Not to worry we have arranged for a change of venue;

The meeting will go on as planned but the new location is at a restaurant 婷婷翠玉 at 174 AnHo Road, Section Two. (rough translation of name is Tender, Pretty Green Jade.) You will be able to tell the restaurant by the lace curtains on the window--it was used in a TV commercial a while back. (We will have the downstairs room--breakfast cost will be cheaper than Shannon's) phone 2736-8510.

Restaurant is right between Far Eastern Plaza Mall/Hotel and HoPing East Road--about a half a block north of the corner of HoPing East Road Sec. 3 and AnHo Road. or a half a block south of Far Eastern Plaza on the AnHo Road side.

Easiest ways to get there; Take the MRT Mucha Line to the Liuchangli Station exit there, and walk west on HoPing East Road 3/4 of a block till you reach where AnHo Road dead-ends into it.Then go north on AnHo Road; it is on the west side of that street.

Or take any bus down HoPing East Road and get off at the first stop that is east of Tun Hua South Road. That will put you at the corner of HoPing and AnHo.
You can also take a bus down Tun Hua South Road to the stop right across from Far Eastern Plaza and walk over to AnHo Road.

Or if you take the 235 bus east, it turns off of HoPing onto AnHo Road and the first stop is right across from the restaurant. Should be easy to find. Look to see you all there and sorry for the late change;

[Taiwan]

Excellent Economist Intelligencer on Upcoming Legislative Elections

The Economist Intelligencer has a pretty good piece out on the upcoming legislative elections that manages to cover all the bases, and properly too....

A more prosaic, but equally important, cause of the government's problems is that the KMT and its allies have a small majority in the Legislative Yuan (parliament). They have used this majority repeatedly to obstruct the economic initiatives of the government, which in turn has enabled them to accuse Mr Chen of neglecting Taiwan's economy. (Mr Chen's frequent focus on controversial issues related to Taiwan's sovereignty and national identity has made him an easier target in this respect.)

How often do you see a forthright depiction of the actual problems the government faces in carrying out its program? Good work. The Economist also explains how the changes in the legislature work:

Next weekend's general election will involve a number of important changes in Taiwan's Legislative Yuan and the manner in which it is constituted. The number of seats will be reduced from 225 to 113. In addition, legislators' terms will be extended from three years to four, and one-half of the 34 seats allotted to the parties based on their share of the political-party vote will be held by female legislators. Redistricting, based chiefly on population, has also changed the political landscape, and for the first time legislators will be elected from single-member districts (73 seats, representing 73 districts). Voters will cast two votes, one for a district candidate and one for a political party—the latter determining the allocation of the 34 seats based on party performance. The remaining six seats will be allocated to aboriginal people.

These reforms promise to bring about a welcome maturing of Taiwan's democratic system. Lengthening the term of the Legislative Yuan will, for example, reduce the number of elections. This is an important change in a system where the frequency of major elections has exacerbated the partisan nature of politics. In theory, reducing the number of legislators and lengthening their terms could make the Legislative Yuan less fractious (fewer loud, angry voices) and more stable, reducing disruptions to policymaking. Perhaps most importantly, the new system will synchronise the parliamentary and presidential election cycles, ensuring that the interruption of campaigning into daily politics occurs only once every four years.

The new voting system may remove another cause of Taiwan's ill-tempered politics. Under the old system, some constituencies elected as many as 12 legislators, making it important for politicians to differentiate themselves not just from opponents in different political parties, but even from supposed allies in their own. In this way the old system encouraged politicians to campaign on personalities rather than policies, and undermined intra-party unity. In a more general sense, the system was widely perceived to have fostered vote-buying and corruption, as well as the participation of organised crime in politics in Taiwan.

Is the new format reducing vote buying? The papers here report more than 6,000 cases already under investigation by the government graft units, although some of those involve the same persons more than once. Because of the advantages that accrue to incumbents, this election is vitally important. Those elected legislators will have several years to continue expanding their patronage networks as the only representative from their district, meaning that it will be them or nobody handing out favors. This will magnify the advantages of incumbency and thus, the importance of this election -- meaning that vote buying will be all the more important.

The IHT has a piece on the 200,000 Chinese spouses in Taiwan who cannot vote, due to suspicions about their pro-China views. And because it has nothing to do with elections, let's give a big hand to the Taiwan embroidery expert, one of the world's top five, who has been contracted to fix the 200 year old American flag that inspired our national anthem.

[Taiwan]

A-bian interviewed in Chicago Trib

President Chen Shui-bian is interviewed in the Chicago Tribune by long-time Taiwan scholar Dennis Hickey. An excerpt:

Q Why wouldn't a return to the "one-China principle" lead to peace with China?

A Past presidents of Taiwan supported the idea of eventual unification with China. Did this lead to peace? In the 1950s, [Chinese leaders] threatened to "wash Taiwan with blood." In the 1990s, they fired missiles at Taiwan. China's threats and diplomatic oppression of Taiwan did not stop because the KMT accepted the one-China principle and the goal of ultimate unification.

Q Taiwan's opposition Chinese Nationalist Party, known as the KMT, is reaching out to the Chinese Communist Party, and leaders of the two parties have met. Any comment?

A This is just part of China's "united front" tactics and divide-and-conquer strategy. The KMT has not learned any lessons from the past. When they are of no use or value anymore, the CCP will throw them away like rubbish.

So true....

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [2008 Presidential Election]

China Overtakes US in Manufacturing?

Longtime Taiwan supporter John Tacik writes on China's superpower economy -- and also shows what can be done with purchasing power parity and similar attempts to gauge the productivity and wealth of whole economies:

China's new status is not surprising. China has been the world's leading producer of steel, copper, aluminum, cement, and coal for several years. As a consumer, China surpassed Japan as the globe's second largest importer of petroleum in 2005. In 2006, China surpassed Japan as the world's No. 2 auto market, with total sales of 7.2 million vehicles and production of 7.3 million. In 2007, China also became the world's top producer of merchant ships.[2] In short, one needs no number-juggling from the World Bank to know that China is an economic superpower.

But the revised World Bank numbers have the effect of minimizing the impact of China's impressive growth. Most commentators claimed the new World Bank numbers showed China "shrinking."[3] In fact, the Bank merely lowered the factor for China's purchasing power parity (PPP), a multiplier used by economists to make realistic comparisons of global economies.

In 2006, America's manufacturing sector produced about $2.7 trillion in goods. China's manufacturing sector produced about 8.74 trillion yuan in goods, or about $1.124 trillion at the prevailing exchange rate of 7.77 yuan to the U.S. dollar. But the real value of China's output is more than twice the exchange-rate value, according to price studies done by the World Bank for the year 2005.

In an exhaustive study published on December 17, 2007, the World Bank's international Comparison Program (ICP)[4] determined that, in China, one only needs about 3.4 yuan to buy what would be a dollar's worth of goods on the U.S. market -- far less than half of the official exchange rate. So, the World Bank lowered China's PPP -- last set in the 1980s -- from about 3.94 times the nominal exchange rate to about 2.38 times the nominal exchange rate.

Not surprisingly, The Economist magazine arrived at a similar figure for PPP simply by checking the prices of "Big Macs" at McDonald's restaurants around the world (The Economist sharpened the figure to 3.42 in its February 1, 2007 issue).[5] Sure enough, a Big Mac that cost $3.22 in Richmond, Virginia, sold for 11.00 yuan (or about $1.41) in Guangzhou.

The World Bank study simply confirmed that this pricing deflator is valid across the entire Chinese economy. Applying the PPP factor of 2.38, China's $1.124 trillion worth of manufacturing output would be worth $2.717 trillion on the U.S. market --slightly higher than America's $2.7 trillion in manufacturing output.

Where does the 800 pound gorilla sit? Depends on what price deflator you use...

UPDATE: For a counterpoint, NPR has a good series of articles on the Yellow River, in peril due to development...

[Taiwan]

Defense News: Taiwan's Declining International Status

Wendell Minnick, who writes on Asian defense affairs and is based in our very own Taipei, had an excellent article today in Defense News on Taiwan's declining international support:

China is having success in its diplomatic and economic campaign to weaken international support for Taiwan, the self-governing island’s de facto ambassador to Washington said.

Joseph Wu, whose official title is representative of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO), argues that Beijing has used diplomatic and economic thuggery and threats to weaken U.S. resolve to defend Taiwan and undermine Taipei’s efforts to get recognition in the United Nations.

Quite true -- and this shows how important it is to change the UN initiative to "Taiwan" rather than ROC. Because "Taiwan" has no inherent conflict with China, since it does not claim to rule China, unlike the ROC. What a tragedy that the Chiang government never grasped a proposal by a high ranking insider, proposed to the US in 1972, to turn Taiwan into "the Chinese Republic on Taiwan" in which "Chinese" was only an ethnic label and not a political term. Too many insurmountable political obstacles..... I love the opening sentence of the next paragraph.

Washington has become increasingly critical of Taiwan’s democratic initiatives. In particular, President Chen Shui-Bian has been pushing for a public referendum on allowing Taiwan to join the United Nations. The issue has irritated both Beijing and Washington.

How often do you see the referendum referred to as a "democratic initiative" in the international media? I will rain beers on Minnick if I ever see him in Taipei.

After Wu claimed that US officials were "addicted" to Chinese help, Randall Schriver said that was overstated:

“Certain challenges may be best addressed through U.S.-China cooperation, and thus it makes complete sense the U.S. should explore possible cooperation with Beijing on these matters,” said Randy Schriver, now with Washington-based Armitage International. “But remember, the United States still sanctions China for Tiananmen activities, still criticizes China for human rights abuses, still sells arms to Taiwan and still welcomes the Dalai Lama to Washington for an audience with the president. If Washington was overly dependent on Beijing for diplomacy and trade, you’d likely see a very different approach on these and other matters.”

Schriver has long been a friend of Taiwan.

Wu fears a weakened Taiwan will result in an unnecessary war in the region at a time when the U.S. Pacific Command has been moving troops and materiel to the Mideast.

He argued that a weak Taiwan military will encourage Chinese military adventurism, while a strong Taiwan military would foster regional stability.

U.S. officials declined four times in 2007 to accept Taiwan’s letter of request for price and availability for 66 F-16s. Wu said the fighter jets would help the island defend itself without U.S. support. Without them and other weapons, the U.S. military may have to fight a devastating war in the Taiwan Strait.

Almost everyone, except perhaps the Administration, has made the connection between the criminal and stupid war in Iraq and declining US influence in the Pacific. The sad part is that the US hasn't seemed to want to encourage someone else to step up and fill its shoes temporarily (read: Japan) while it is off blowing up its treasury, reputation, and military in the Middle East.

Support for Taiwan is eroding in the U.S. Congress, long a steadfast advocate, Wu said: “The Chinese influence of Congress is growing.”

Forces inside Taiwan have helped erode external support, he said. The pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has been more aggressive about pushing for freedom from Chinese influence. Ten years ago, a majority of Taiwan citizens identified themselves as Chinese, while today, some 80 percent self-identify as Taiwanese, Wu said.

The connections made here are just plain weird. The previous paragraph points out that China's influence in Congress is increasing, and then the next paragraph complains about the DPP's policy of "... pushing for freedom from Chinese influence." Whatever that means. It then offers some stats on local identity. However, Minnick does not explain how enhanced local identity has led to a fall off in Congressional support. There's no connection between the two! Has a line gone AWOL?

The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which lost the 2000 presidential election, has since been working against the rival DPP. KMT leaders have traveled to Beijing to pay respect to the Chinese Communist Party, while KMT legislators have blocked proposed defense budgets and security measures.

The paragraph above is a great paragraph -- it is not often that one sees in the international media references to the ongoing cooperation between the KMT and the CCP. I should add that I read that CSIS reported that after the 2000 election, KMT representatives went to China to instruct Beijing not to negotiate with Chen Shui-bian.

What China fears most is a DPP victory in both the legislature and presidency, which could push the KMT out of political power. The DPP’s Frank Hsieh and the KMT’s Ma Ying-jeou face each other in the March presidential election.

Hard to see how anyone could fear a DPP win on Saturday. T'aint gonna happen. But the last section is wonderful:

Wu said Beijing had harassed Taiwanese delegations at international meetings with nongovernment organizations (NGO), coercing hospital, firefighter and hairdressing groups and beauty contestants to change Taiwan’s title to “Chinese Taipei.” Chinese thugs have shown up at many NGO conferences and ripped Taiwan flags from flagpoles.

In one incident watched by millions of Taiwanese on local TV, Chinese thugs bullied a Taiwanese beauty pageant contestant to tears.

The result has been increasing distaste for Beijing within Taiwan and fears that Chinese rule over Taiwan would be brutal.

Yup. Each time China abuses Taiwan, it chills Taiwanese hearts.

[Taiwan] [US] [China] [2008 Presidential Election]

Formosa Betrayed Movie Website

Just a quickie in between errands -- Marc in Taipei flipped me this link to the official website of the new movie Formosa Betrayed. Now in pre-production, the movie is based on the murder of a Carnegie-Mellon Professor, Chen Wen-chen, in 1981 in Taiwan, apparently by KMT security forces. The Taipei Times has some more here on the case. Jerome has reporter Tina Chou's article on getting kicked out of Taiwan for using the world "autopsy" in connection with the case.

I'm really looking forward to this movie -- it will be a great profile raiser and sympathy generator for Taiwan.

[Taiwan]

Shannon Meet Up Jan 12

Jerome Keating sends the word:

+++++++++++++++++

To all,

Our January meeting will be on Saturday January 12 at Shannon's as usual. [That's 10:00 AM the Shannon on Tun Hua N Rd across from the concert venue, next to Dan Ryan's -- MT]

The speaker is Natalie Tso, Program Host and Reporter English Service for Radio Taiwan International.

Radio Taiwan International at one time in the past was the Voice of Free China, but like most things has adapted to the changing times.

The website is www.rti.org.tw You can check it out for history and also FAQ

Natalie will talk about goals and new directions of RTI and probably give a little of the history of the station. It currently employs about 400 people.

Natalie said that they will be opening a new web program for foreigners and will be looking for input from everyone; this may be a chance to put your two cents in.

Also I noticed in the paper that RTI is advertising a position for someone in the area of webcasting; those looking to get in on such may want to come to find out more.

On a different note, I had noticed that the Taipei Times had been advertising for a sports writer; I know a number out there like to write and if you like sports it could be a new career area; Chinese language was not essential.

Hope the Year of the Rat will be good for all of us. In February we will not have a monthly meeting since New Years falls early in the month and people will be going in different directions.

Jerome

++++++++++

Speaking of jobs, a friend in Hong Kong says City University there is looking for English teachers.

UPDATE: I've just heard that the budget cuts to RTI's budget went through, so it is likely that none of these new jobs will be possible. The website Culture.tw is also being shut down due to the same funding cuts, although what is already there will remain online.

[Taiwan]

Daily Links, Jan 5, 2008

Profuse apologies for not getting out my links recently. Been busy, and sick...

Pinyin News blogs on mandarin borrow ing English grammatical forms.

Wild at Heart blogs on a proposed tree-planting plan.

bent wonders...where do the candidates stand on Taiwan?

The Only Redhead, focuses on the growing importance of the present in the DPP's campaign.

Todd examines Historical Sites in Taipei Vol 1 and 2

Jerome examines a number of KMT myths, like the KMT created the Taiwan Miracle.

Taoyuan Nights blogs on Exchange Traded Funds.

Talking Taiwanese on exposing Taiwan's language education in Europe.

MEDIA: The conservative Jamestown Foundation asks whether China has plans for three carrier battle groups. Enjoy this editorial from the China Post Staff ("China Post Staff" is often signal of translation from a Chinese language source) on why support for Hsieh has fallen to only 12%, a record low. Taiwan enjoys record exports in 2007, moving one place ahead of South Korea in per capita export rankings.

[Taiwan]