The electorate in Taiwan may not have known exactly what the 1992 consensus actually meant at the time of the election; however it may be seen as simply representing cross-strait stability.47 People in Taiwan wanted to continue the stability under President Ma that was once lost under former President Chen. Most Taiwanese did not enjoy the undercurrent of a threat from China during Chen‟s two terms. When Ma was elected in 2008, there was more stability returned to the cross straits and the electorate awarded Ma a second term for this perceived stability. “Therefore, it would be more accurate to say that Ma‟s win is an endorsement of cross-strait stability,
whereas Tsai fails to convince people that she can.”48 The electorate wanted a more stable relationship with China and thus awarded President Ma a second term in office. The 1992 Consensus and issues surrounding it did not go away in 2012. The consensus still plays a pivotal role in Taiwanese politics to this day and will play a role in the 2016 election. This will be developed further when the 2016 election will be discussed.
III. ECFA and Business
There is a saying in the hard sciences that math is the handmaiden of science. In the social sciences the direct equivalent would be that economics is the handmaiden of politics. The two are inseparable. This is the case throughout the whole world; Taiwan is no exception to this phenomenon. When taking control in 2008, President Ma pledged greater economic cooperation and bi-lateral trade with China. He believed that this would help Taiwan‟s economy as well as keep China relatively satisfied. To some, his reelection in 2012 was a sign that the majority of the electorate approved of his handling of the economy. It was also seen as approval of Ma‟s government signing the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA). ECFA is a controversial preferential free trade agreement between the People‟s Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan).49 This trade agreement would provide a lot of economic opportunity for Taiwan, in fact according to experts, the benefit to Taiwan far outweighs the benefits China would receive. “The advantage to Taiwan would amount to US$13.8 billion (NT$443 billion),
47 Huang, D. WF. (2012) Elections in Taiwan: Lessons from the Past, and Policy Issues for the New Administration, IEAS, Academic Sinica Taiwan
48 Huang, D. WF.
49 ECFA Signing Scheduled for June 29, Taiwan News (2010, June 25)
http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=1299089&lang=eng_news&cate_img=83.jpg&cate_rss=
news_Politics_TAIWAN accessed May 24, 2015
‧
reports said, while China would receive benefits estimated at US$2.8 billion (NT$90 billion).”
50While it is obvious that ECFA would help Taiwan in the short run, many worried that by signing ECFA President Ma was signing over Taiwan‟s future to a nation that considers Taiwan part of its own territory.
ECFA was designed to allow Taiwanese businessmen access to the Chinese market. It also allowed Taiwan to sign various trade agreements with nations that previously only had trade agreements with China. Because of the design of ECFA, it benefited the business class, the shangbanzu 上班族. Most businesspeople already supported the Kuomintang Party because of its conservative economic policies, the signing of ECFA was more closely aligned with what a KMT president and cabinet would do. Since Taiwan‟s economy did incredibly well in 2012 and relatively well in 201151 many people in Taiwan saw this as vindication of Ma Ying-jeou and his signing of ECFA. To the majority of Taiwanese, if Ma had not signed ECFA than there was no way the economy could have performed so well. Tsai Ing-wen and the Democratic Progressive Party did not support ECFA. They believed that ECFA would harm Taiwanese workers by slowly transferring factory jobs offshore to China. Although ECFA would initially provide Taiwan a lot of economic assistance, eventually it would not benefit Taiwan. Because of Taiwan‟s economic performance, and Tsai‟s opposition to ECFA, many businesspeople voted against her and this is another reason as to why she lost. I believe that the situation between China and Taiwan in regards to ECFA is easier to understand if we look at the situation in North America with NAFTA. NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, was designed to allow Mexico, Canada and the US to compete with each other in differing industries. Canada would receive some benefits, Mexico would receive some, and the US (in theory) would receive some. However, ever since the signing of NAFTA the United States has slowly lost a vast multitude of manufacturing jobs to Mexico where labor is cheaper. To say that NAFTA is a total failure would be disingenuous though. At the time NAFTA was signed, the United States
received many benefits from the trade agreement. Over time though, these benefits have vanished. This is what ECFA is going to do to Taiwan. In the short term Taiwan will receive these benefits, but in a few years China will be the one profiting. Voters in Taiwan, like voters
50 ECFA Signing Scheduled for June 29
51 Taiwan Economy: Growth Update, 天下杂志 tianxia zazhi,
http://english.cw.com.tw/article.do?action=show&id=12635 accessed May 27, 2015
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
46
everywhere, were mainly concerned with immediate results. When they saw that Taiwan‟s economy was doing well they decided to reward Ma with reelection. One of my interviewees who support the KMT had very poignant words when it came to describing ECFA: “If we did not sign ECFA our economy would die right away. Only through ECFA can Taiwan hope to develop more FTAs.” In his opinion, if Taiwan were to decide not to sign ECFA, the economy would be doomed right away.
Since signing ECFA, direct flights between Taiwan and the Mainland have become more frequent. During the election, many Taiwanese in China were encouraged to fly back home to vote in the election to support Ma Ying-jeou “Huang Jin-hsun, chief of the Association of Taiwan Investment Enterprises in Chongqing, is encouraging the members of his association to return to Taiwan for the Jan. 14 presidential elections.”52 Although the trade organizations and business groups did not come out and say that returning Taiwanese citizens should vote for a certain candidate, it was understood that most of these businesspeople would vote for Ma
because it was his policies that allowed them to set up in China in the first place. The Democratic Progressive Party claimed that the Communist government in Beijing was subsidizing the flights back to Taiwan, purchasing tickets for businesspeople.53 If these allegations are proven true, it would be an unprecedented step that China would have taken to meddle in Taiwan‟s internal affairs. This would be more proof that Ma Ying-jeou stole the election with the help of the government in Mainland China and it would make it easier to understand why Tsai Ing-wen lost the election to Ma. It would also destroy the credibility of the Kuomintang and the Ma
administration. If they were willing to allow China, whom they are technically still at war with, to assist them in gaining votes, it would be treasonous. This would be the proof that the DPP would need to show to the entire population that the KMT is more interested in winning elections and placating China than protecting Taiwan‟s sovereignty. To some people in Taiwan, this was proof that Ma is China‟s puppet. A large number of people believe that Ma is in the pocket of China. If the allegations about the Chinese government helping him win the 2012 election are true, it is no wonder why Tsai lost.
52 Taiwanese Citizens in China book their election flights, Want China Times (2012, January 4)
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20120104000071&cid=1501 accessed May 29, 2015
53 Taiwanese Citizens in China book their election flights
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
47 IV. Business Pressure
In the 2012 election and campaign it was no secret that big business supported the KMT and President Ma. The business community wanted to keep developing the ties that has been forged by Ma as they saw these links as important for business. One case of prominence in the 2012 campaign cycle was that of Evergreen founder Chang Yung-fa. Mr. Chang, being a businessman, held major influence over people. He came out strong for the KMT by stating that the 1992 Consensus was of utmost importance for cross strait relations. Chang claimed that anyone that denies the 1992 Consensus was not fit to be president. “The tycoon (Chang) said on Tuesday that he “simply cannot agree with the denial of the [1992] consensus by a „specific‟ presidential candidate.”54 This naturally caused controversy, especially for the pan green coalition. Chang‟s endorsement of the 1992 Consensus was seen as being beneficial to the KMT and Ma as this showed that big business backed the KMT. The business community believed that only Ma and the KMT could continue to better Taiwan‟s economy. This translated into many endorsements for the KMT and Ma by the business community which assisted Ma in fending off the challenge by Tsai.
Chang was not the only business leader to heavily emphasize the importance of the 1992
Consensus and endorse Ma. Many other business leaders also lent their voices and support to Ma and the KMT. “A group of business leaders have in recent weeks publicly endorsed the so-called
“1992 consensus” and have appeared to offer their support for Ma, including Hon Hai Precision Industry chairman Terry Gou (郭台銘), Ruentex Financial Group chairman Samuel Yin and others.”55 It was clear by the business community rallying around the 1992 Consensus that many in the business world desired a Ma victory. The business community attacked Tsai based off of her denial of the 1992 Consensus. Accessing the large Chinese market was of the utmost
importance for these businesspeople and only Ma represented bettering relations with Mainland China. The business community saw China as more of an opportunity than a threat an thus they responded accordingly by supporting Ma.
54 2012 Elections: TSU Criticizes Evergreen founder, Taipei Times (2012, January 6)
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2012/01/06/2003522558 accessed October 5, 2015
55 2012 Elections: TSU Criticizes Evergreen founder
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
48 V. Internal DPP Factors, KMT Factors
While there are many external factors that influence the outcomes of election as we have seen so far, sometimes there are internal factors that impede a candidate and a campaign, and this can be seen in Tsai Ing-wen‟s campaign. After the election results were known publically, Tsai Ing-wen and the DPP came out and gave reasons as to why they lost. One was that the KMT had run a better campaign. According to a DPP spokesman, Lin Yu-chang, “The committee agreed that the KMT had run a more “technically successful” campaign in terms of crisis management and campaign tactics, as well as communications, Lin added.”56 The KMT has existed longer and has more resources than the DPP. Because of this, they have the finances to run more campaigns and, frankly, garner power through their money. Anecdotally, if you were to look at the social
networking site Facebook and the amount of people who have “liked” ma Ying-jeou‟s Facebook page versus the amount of people who have “liked” Tsai Ing-wen‟s page, you will see major differences. Ma‟s page has far many more followers than Tsai‟s page. While this may not mean much in the political world, it helps to track the amount of social support a politician or political party may have. Because Tsai‟s campaign did not have as much funding and support as the KMT backed Ma campaign, it is no wonder that her campaign could not compete with the Ma
campaign. It also shows that organization is very important when campaigning for political office. While it is unquestionable that Tsai did everything within her power to win, if the people running her campaign come up short and do not perform as well as their equivalents on the Ma side, than they will lose. Tsai and Ma were not the only people who were running for office.
Every single one of their campaign staff and volunteers was running with them. It did not matter how well Tsai spoke or performed, if her subordinates were not performing better than the campaign staff under Ma, they would lose.
Ma Ying-jeou and the KMT may have used more questionable means than their superior political clout to win the election. It is possible that Ma and his campaign may have used government funds and resources unscrupulously to further his campaign. “Taiwan's opposition challenger for the presidency has accused intelligence services under the control of incumbent
56 DPP Cites Six Main Reasons for Loss, Taipei Times (2012, February 16)
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2012/02/16/2003525589/1 accessed May 29, 2015
‧
President Ma Ying-jeou of tracking her campaign events for political advantage.”57Allegations such as these are very serious matters because if proven true, it is a direct attack on Taiwanese Democracy and reminiscent of the times under the KMT regime before the 1990s. It would also help shed some light on why Tsai lost in an election that was considered very close by experts.
Although not proven outright, the allegations were first reported in Taiwan‟s Next magazine and were later repeated by DPP officials and Tsai‟s campaign. “The allegations of intelligence service abuse were first raised last week by Taiwan's Next magazine, which said the National Security Council secretary General Hu Wei-chen instructed justice ministry investigators to monitor Tsai's activities in May after she became a presidential candidate.”58 The Ma government clearly had some connection between what was going on in their intelligence department and the actions taken against the Tsai campaign. This kind of political espionage is shocking, however not unheard of. In the United States we have had a few similar issues such as Watergate. It was hard for Tsai Ing-wen to compete just on her own, but add in this political trickery and her proverbial goose was cooked. It is hard to win elections fairly; it is even harder to win them when the deck is stacked against you. If these allegations are ever proven true it will go a long way toward understanding why Tsai Ing-wen lost. It would also be a horrendous abuse of power by the Ma administration that conjures up images of the autocratic KMT regime before the DPP was legalized.
The previous examinations into why Tsai Ing-wen lost the election are very important; however, one substantial reason cannot be overlooked is, Ma Ying-jeou chose his words very carefully during the campaign season. It is true that all politicians, in order to get elected, will say and do things to appeal to voters; President Ma Ying-jeou certainly is a prime example of a leader who excels at this kind of political jargon. Before being elected in 2004, Ma would make such statements as “the future of Taiwan will be determined by 23 million people”.59 This was received well by the majority of the Taiwanese electorate because this candidate stood out from the President Chen in that he wanted to seek out a more diplomatic approach with China while
57 Spying Claim Against Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou, The Guardian, (2012, January 3)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/03/spying-claim-taiwan-president-election accessed May 30, 2015
58 Spying Claim Against Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou
59馬英九主張：兩岸統一、台灣未來兩岸人民共同決定！ma yingjiu zhuzhang: liangan tongyi, Taiwan welai liangan renmin gongtong jueding, http://www.hi-on.org.tw/bulletins.jsp?b_ID=113160 accessed June 29, 2015
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
50
simultaneously supporting the idea of Taiwan as a sovereign nation. These dichotomous positions are antithetical if examined closely.
Upon winning the election in 2004 and regaining the presidency for the Kuomintang Party, President Ma seemed to have a change of heart when he said in December 2005 “our party‟s ultimate goal is reunification”. 我們黨的終極目標是統一!60 He again, shook Taiwan politically when in February 2006 he stated “Taiwan‟s future will be determined by the people of the cross-straits.”臺灣未來有兩岸人民共同決定!61 Judging from his statements before and after his election, it can be argued that Ma said certain things before the election in 2004 to garner votes.
After being elected he let his true opinions come out. He is a classic example of a “flip-flopper”
in that he chooses his rhetoric carefully based on the political sentience of the time. By saying that the population of Taiwan will decide Taiwan‟s future, it is implied that only Taiwanese citizens will determine their futures. On the other hand, when you say that Taiwan‟s future will be determined by over one billion people, it is implied that China will take part in the
negotiations. To many Taiwanese this was very controversial. Ma wanted to have it both ways.
While these issues happened in the 2004 election season, they came back in the 2012 election season. The Tsai campaign battered Ma by reminding him that he had said these words not four years ago. They also made sure he remembered that after he was elected he changed his positions.
In order to placate China, Ma changed his words to make them less clear. In theory Tsai should have benefited from Ma‟s choice of words. However, because most Taiwanese citizens did not want to exasperate China any further, they believed what Ma said and what he believed was different. During the Chen presidency relations with China got so bad that China threatened war.
While it was not something new, the threats increased greatly under Chen. Most Taiwanese citizens did not want to see this happen again and they believed a Tsai presidency would only deteriorate relations with Beijing.
Although Tsai Ing-wen was not the DPP candidate during the 2004 presidential election, the words and decisions made by Ma during that campaign season should have hurt him more with
60馬英九主張：兩岸統一、台灣未來兩岸人民共同決定！ma yingjiu zhuzhang: liangan tongyi, Taiwan welai liangan renmin gongtong jueding
61馬英九主張：兩岸統一、台灣未來兩岸人民共同決定！ma yingjiu zhuzhang: liangan tongyi, Taiwan welai liangan renmin gongtong jueding
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
51
voters. However, as seen by his reelection, even though he changed his words on the issue of who would decide Taiwan‟s future, the voters still reelected him. Even though Tsai made
voters. However, as seen by his reelection, even though he changed his words on the issue of who would decide Taiwan‟s future, the voters still reelected him. Even though Tsai made