The forthcoming December 11 parliamentary elections in Taiwan loom as a potentially decisive event in the tense and turbulent Cross-Straits relationship.

A crucial aspect of the upcoming parliamentary election is that it should not be regarded as a mere competition among Taiwanese political parties. Since Chen came to power in 2000, the lack of legislative support has significantly limited the DPP’s room for maneuver, not only in the controversial field of Taiwan’s relationship with China. President Chen has also been blaming the KMT’s “veto policy” for impeded the elaboration and implementation of coherent and efficient economic reforms. For the DPP, the quest for the country’s political future is also at stake. It is believed that the division between the central government and the parliament was an important obstacle for the implementation of the DPP’s scheme on Taiwan’s status.

Since early 2004, the government has started to discuss the possibility of working on a constitutional reform in Taiwan. Beyond the fact to address the mere issue of political cohabitation, the reform process is intended to enable Taiwan to stand as a self-governed entity ruled under the framework of a mature democratic system. In this perspective, any harsh reactions on the part of China (PRC), especially military ones, would be seen as jeopardizing moves against human rights and the principle of self-determination.

The question as to the future status of Taiwan remains an important cause of division between the two main Taiwanese political parties.

Generally speaking, members of the KMT have been more vague than the DPP on this highly controversial issue. On the one hand they take the view that the international community should recognize Taiwan as it recognized the founding of People’s Republic of China and that they consider that Taiwan should maintain its official name ‘Republic of China’. On the other hand, regarding the issue of national sovereignty, they would rather maintain the present status quo, that is neither struggle for an official independence nor acceptance of unification. It is proposed that a special status in the international community should be conceived for Taiwan. Lastly, in matter of economy, the KMT tends to seek closer co-operation with China than the DPP.

Inversely, the DPP could more easily be regarded as a pro-independence party. As a main argument in favour of the country’s recognition, the party insists on the idea that Taiwan was never legally returned to China after the end of the Japanese colonial era. They also put forward the fact that after the KMT dictatorship that lasted until the early 1990’s, the democratic elections that were held to end this dictatorship made Taiwan a self-determined nation on the international scene. However, after the DPP came to power in the late 1990s, it has tended to adopt a less definite its position as regards Taiwan’s independence. But it is clear that for the DPP, Taiwan ought to be considered as independent and sovereign by the international community.

The 2004 to 2008 period is considered as particularly crucial in the context of the cross-strait conflict. In the case the DPP, gaining the majority in the Parliament would imply political strength and coherence since the parliament should be willing to collaborate with the executive and implement the party’s policy. Political analysts believe the DPP government would adopt a much firmer position in dealing with China since it would stand on a steady basis and lean less on questionable public support.

The defeat of the presidential election at the beginning of 2004 has caused great damage for the KMT. In order to regain its public support in the upcoming election, the KMT strongly warns the public that if the DPP were to win, it would de facto gain a monopoly, which may lead to another party dictatorship in Taiwan. In addition, since China has refused to re-open negotiations regarding the ‘Three Communiques’ after former Taiwanese President, Lee Tung-Hui, referred to Taiwan as a sovereign nation during an interview with a German journalist, the KMT took the view the DPP’s harsh attitude towards China could jeopardize the economic benefits from a closer relationship with China.

For Taiwanese people, this is another crucial moment for political statements to the international community. However, compared to the presidential election in April 2004, people seem to be even more cautious in making their choices. One source in Taiwan said that for the presidential election, people could easily mark the candidates on the basis of fundamental differences of political ideologies. Therefore, it was easier for the political analysts to predict how people were going to make their choices. However, for the coming parliamentary election, people’s decisions can be based on personal and community interests which may link less to the divisions of political ideologies.

Moreover, the political uncertainty in northeast Asia may also affect people’s decision-making. Since US has decided to stay more aside while dealing with the cross-strait issue, Taiwanese people may feel insecure and very cautious about any of their political choices. The priority for people in Taiwan would be certainty and the security. But how to achieve these goals? Taiwanese people are at the crossroad and suspicious in choosing their next direction.

By Wan-jing Wang