Does the victory of Kuomintang (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou over the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)'s candidate Frank Hsieh in Taiwan's March 22 presidential election spell the impending demise of Taiwan's independence movement? Not quite, said Alan Wachman, associate professor of international politics, Tufts University, at an event sponsored by the Asia Program March 25. In Wachman's view, today's KMT has undergone a tremendous shift in political agenda compared to the preceding "old guard" KMT of the sixties, seventies and early eighties. Regarding Taiwan's independence, this new generation of leaders, including Ma, embraces a version that is "less confrontational," and "more prudent" than the pro-independence DPP, but nevertheless quite similar. In fact, the KMT no longer uses "(re-)unification" with China as a primary platform to mobilize voters, and Ma himself has made public statements declaring that the Republic of China (Taiwan's official name) is a sovereign and independent state.

Wachman then turned his attention to the two United Nations-related referenda which were on separate ballots for voters on March 22. One was sponsored by the DPP, and called on Taiwan to apply for UN membership under the name of Taiwan. The other, sponsored by the KMT and generally considered less provocative, called for application under whatever term (Taiwan or Republic of China) was deemed appropriate. In fact, both referenda failed to pass. Nonetheless, Wachman characterized China's reaction to the DPP referendum as a "diplomacy of panic." China called the DPP referendum a first step toward independence, and heavily denounced it. The United States also criticized the referendum, but what was troubling to Wachman was that the United States was not even-handed, but rather wagged its finger only at Taiwan. Wachman felt that Washington should have pointed out to China that its argument failed to explain why a referendum to rejoin the UN was a move toward independence, and that, in any case, the United States should have advised both sides to cool the rhetoric. In Wachman's view, very few, if any, public statements from the U.S. government have demonstrated a sense of balance on this issue.

John Hsieh, professor of political science at the University of South Carolina, noted that, in general, elections in Taiwan are more predictable than those in most western democracies. For the most part, the parties in western countries are split over such issues as religion and income. Party structure in Taiwan, on the other hand, is more rigid, determined mainly by national identity, not by class. Hsieh therefore concluded that Ma's victory was not surprising. Since the founding of the DPP in the 1980s, KMT support among the Taiwanese people has stood at approximately 50 percent of the electorate, with DPP support being around 40 percent; 10 percent have historically been swing votes. This is why the KMT is the majority party, and has always controlled the legislature. Presidential elections are more idiosyncratic, and thus the DPP was able to win the presidency in 2000 and 2004. For the foreseeable future, Hsieh sees no change in this pattern. The best the DPP can hope for, in his opinion, is to occasionally win the presidency.

Emerson Niou, professor of political science at Duke University, has been conducting research and gathering polling data since 2003 on Taiwan. His most recent survey occurred in February of this year. Regarding China-Taiwan relations, approximately 60 percent of respondents favor the status quo. Less than half of the respondents supports what Niou called "independence at a high cost," where China would probably resort to military force if Taiwan declared independence. On the other hand, when asked if they would support "independence at a low cost," where China would not attack if Taiwan declared independence, not surprisingly almost 66 percent of the respondents said yes. In terms of unification, most respondents (over 70 percent) did not favor "unification at a high cost" but almost half (46 percent) of them would support "unification at a low cost." Niou also observed that if you ask respondents what is likely rather than what they prefer on the independence/reunification continuum, one discovers that very few people, even those who strongly support one option or the other, think that either independence or reunification is likely in the near future.

Drafted by Susan T. Lee, Program Assistant, Asia Program
Edited by Mark Mohr, Program Associate, Asia Program
Robert M. Hathaway, Director, Asia Program. Ph: (202) 691-4020