Democratization of Taiwan - Literature review Example

Democratization of Taiwan Student Name Course Tutor Date Democratization of Taiwan A democratic state is defined as one where the people can freely elect leaders of their own choice (Jacobs 2012, p5). The push for democratic reforms in Taiwan (Republic of China) started in the 1970s under the authoritarian leadership of martial law. There was a lot of criticism from the Western regarding the undemocratic state of the country due to upholding of martial law. The leadership of the country had for many years been under one party referred to as Kuomintang (KMT) that was made up of Chinese nationalists. The leadership of KMT was characterized by repression of the political opposition and great control of the media. Formation of new parties was not allowed and there were no competitive elections held. Democratization started in mid-1980s when Chaing Ching-kuo was the president and then selected Lee Teng-hui as his vice president. However, before this, the leadership of KMT had started making various steps to democratization through liberalization. These included allowing the formation of other political parties and later lifting of the martial law (Tien, Hung-mao & Chu 1996, p1). All these were efforts to liberalize Taiwan. It can therefore be said that democratization of Taiwan in 1980s came as a result of enlightened leaders that were integrated into KMT’s leadership that favored liberalization. This essay looks at democratization of Taiwan in 1980s and how it was achieved through liberalization. Political transition in Taiwan Transition of Taiwan’s political system from an authoritarian to a democratic regime was achieved through political leadership that had the right attitude towards democracy. This involves realization by authoritarian leaders of benefits of democracy to the people and also for their own survival. As the supreme leader of Kuomintang, Chiang Ching-kuo realized that democratizing Taiwan would benefit his party and also failure to democratize would cause violent conflict in Taiwan. He therefore started the journey to liberalizing Taiwan (Cooper 1989, p174). In December 1978, Chiang Ching-kuo instructed KMT’s Central Standing Committee to come up with a committee that would identify areas where reform is needed including the party affairs, foreign relations, social affairs, military affairs, politics and economics. One of the major recommendations of the committee regarding politics and foreign affairs was to separate judges from the prosecutors by moving the law courts from executive branch to judicial branch. This separation would facilitate the path towards judicial independence. President Chiang believed that legal reform would be the main task on achieving political reform and would form the foundation for achieving democracy (Hu 2005, p31). At one time, Chiang stated that “Democracy must be cultivated and not transplanted and that democracy must be adapted to our own national environment so it can strike root in our own soil” (Hu 2005, p37). This was an indication of his commitment towards democratization of Taiwan. In May 1980, promulgation of a more liberal election law took place which was later followed by an election that saw a number of seats in the legislature filled. The aim of increasing the seats was to ensure that the legislative body was getting closer to being truly representative. His efforts were however hit by setbacks following pressure from the opposition that was made of young Taiwanese elites who were well educated (Chu 1993, p181). This group had however gained strength from political liberalization created by Chiang in 1970s. The group had been mobilized by diplomatic setbacks that Taiwan had experienced from its relations with America. The young elites were dissatisfied with Chiang’s slow pace towards political reforms especially the abolishment of martial rule, and therefore believed they have a role in determining the future of Taiwan (Gold 1991, p53). The group formed a movement referred to as Formosa Group (FG) that led a major confrontation with the KMT. They engaged in violent clash with the police leading to order by Chiang for arrest of the group leaders. This ended with formation of Association of Public Policy (APP) in 1984 that would coordinate their agenda for democratic reform. The opposition group became a strong political force that made Chiang to state his push for dialogue (Hu 2005, p37-38). This was followed by various initiatives by Chiang through a major decision to achieve a major political breakthrough. He formed a 24 people committee made up of two 12 people task forces. Each committee was to look into the issues of abolishment of martial law, reforms in parliament and legalization of opposition parties. In July 1987, Chiang appointed his old friend Lee Huan as the new secretary of KMT to spearhead democracy in Taiwan. In his speech, Lee stated that KMT must not replace the communist party as this would be a violation of the principle of democracy. Even though his statement was criticized by some party members, he was supported by Chiang who instructed him to publish his speech in official journal of KMT. Martial law was lifted by 15th July 1987. By 1st January 1988, Chiang’s government lifted all bans related to political parties as well as the freedom of press. This was a major pathway to democracy. Chiang however died twelve days later. Democratization was however pushed forward to its full success by Lee Teng-hui who took over from Chiang (Hu 2005, p43). Role of liberalization in Taiwan’s democratization Liberalization is a technique that most authoritarian engage so as to increase freedom of speech and the media. It involves allowing the members of opposition party to win some positions in elections but they do not allow them to have full control in those positions. Political liberalization took place in Taiwan in 1986 marked by the founding of Democratic Progressive Party, an opposition party (Copper 1989, p5). This was an act of tolerance by the leadership of the KMT which also allowed DPP to participate in national, provincial and municipal elections. Liberalization was also pushed further by KMT’s relaxation of media control, release of political prisoners who had been arrested for leading protests against authoritarianism, and the amendment of legislation that had been used to suppress civil freedom. KMT had already started democratization within the party marked by election of Central Committee members and party chairman through secret ballot in 1993. Its tolerance towards violent street protests by the opposition was a manifestation of liberalization. It is clear that a certain level of liberalization preceded democratization especially with the restructuring of political institutions to encourage participation of more citizens and elites. This paved the way for major steps that led to complete democratization (Tien 1975, 620). One of the major steps that Chiang took towards democracy was to liberalize representation within the government. This involved appointment of liberal reformists within the leadership of KMT. This started in 1972 when he took over power from his father. He pushed for appointment of young and more educated Taiwanese to be part of his top leadership. Some of the liberal persons that he appointed include: Lee Teng-hui, a holder of PhD in agricultural economics from Cornell, George K.C Yea, a holder of Master of Arts from Cambridge University and Sun Yun-suan who had been trained in the Tennessee Valley Authority. These three had strong reputation of being liberal leaders. Chiang also appointed Kao Yu-shu to head the ministry of transport. Kao Yu-Shu had been the Mayor of Taipei. His political career had been threatened when Taipei was elevated to provincial status by the government. His appointment by Chiang was a clear move that his government was heading towards reforms. Through these appointments, Chiang believed that this would be an indicator that his views were changing. He felt that this would help to ease the difficult diplomatic situation that Taiwan was facing. He wanted to start a new regime by implementing political reforms that would ensure a strong incorruptible government (Jacobs 2012, p11-12). Theories of Taiwan’s liberalization and democratization Political liberalization that led to Taiwan’s democratization can be explained by the elite theory which focuses on the role that political leaders play in the process of democratization and liberalization. Elite theory focuses on this role from two perspectives. One perspective emphasizes on the choices that political leaders make for transforming the state, while the other perspective focuses how the opposition party, Democratic Progressing Party (DPP), interacts with KMT, the ruling party, and well as their role in pushing for democratic reforms. This theory focuses on the role that Chiang Ching-kuo played in starting the democratic reforms as well in allowing the opposition party to be established. In 1986, Chiang gave instructions to his subordinates to explore ways in which DPP can be officially recognized and how the state can be liberalized. Earlier, Chiang had incorporated more Taiwanese elites into his top leadership minimizing reliance on mainlanders from China. The incorporation of Taiwanese elites to liberalize the state was a step to softening his authoritarianism (Laothamatas 1997, p217-218). The elite theory also focuses on the interactions between the ruling party, KMT, and the political opposition. This theory recognizes the important role played by the opposition such as protests on the street, lobbying through the U.S congress and maintaining close relationship with Taiwanese who lived overseas. These strategies forced the KMT elites to renew their stand calling for dialogue with the opposition (Laothamatas 1997, p218). The other theory explaining Taiwan democratization is Greatman Theory of Democratic Transition which explains the great role played by Chiang Ching-kuo in democratizing Taiwan. Proponents of this theory argue that democratization of Taiwan was a personal initiative of Chiang Ching-kuo. The leadership of KMT willingly worked towards democratization and it was not as a result of external pressure from the opposition. They argue that KMT leadership was made of liberals and conservative minded people who would have seen the reforms successful even if Chiang could have not supported it. This theory also recognizes the initiatives that Chiang had taken in steering democratization in Taiwan. These include formation of a 12 person task committees that would make recommendations on measures that should be taken towards political reforms. Among the top issues tackled by the committee were abolishment of martial law and legalization of the opposition. Using his powers as the president, Chiang was able to subdue the powers held by KMT by extending his appointments to non-members, he opened up for dialogue with the members of the opposition parties and also skillfully came up with a framework for interaction between the state and civil societies (Tien & Cheng 1997, p1). The theory also recognizes the role that leaders of KMT played beyond Chiang in pushing democratization forward. This was made possible by the Taiwanization of the leadership of KMT and that of the political arena. This enabled the Taiwanese to join the elite strata playing major roles in the business, professional and academic world. Recruitment of more Taiwanese into KMT was a clear indication of Chiang’s support for political reforms. This ended the conflict between KMT and the elites. The elites were therefore able to play dominant roles in various state institutions ending the dominance of KMT (Greene 1999, p380). Conclusion Even though liberalization seems to have caused a major leap in Taiwan’s democratization, other factors also played minor roles. These include the push for Taiwanization by the opposition who aimed at ending dominance by the minority Chinese Mainlanders who controlled the majority who were Taiwanese. The need for Taiwanese identity was a source of strength to the opposition as it was appealing to other Taiwanese. This was used to attract the public into protests prompting Chiang to call for dialogue. The rises of Taiwan’s middle class as a result of increasing economic growth promoted equality making it difficult for capitalism to thrive. Rapid economic growth took place which also brought about social mobility that enabled people to leave the countryside and work in factories. This realization made KMT to enforce policies that supported social stability for example by ensuring that everybody has access to enough food. The Presbyterian Church also played a role in democratization by ensuring that there are more Taiwanese elites. This was achieved by the Presbyterian missionaries’ desire to speak in the local Taiwanese language, to teach people in the language, to write and also to pray using the language. They came up with academies where they could teach the locals and this was important in creation of the Taiwanese elites (Rubinstein 2006, p111). List of References Jacobs, J 2012, Democratizing Taiwan, Leiden Boston: Brill, Gold, T. B 1991, Civil society and Taiwan's quest for identity, Berkeley: Center for Chinese Studies, University of California, 1991. Hu, C 2005, “Taiwan’s geopolitics and Chiang Ching-Kuo's decision to democratize Taiwan “Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs 5, no.1; 26-44. Rubinstein, M 2006, “The Presbyterian church in the formation of Taiwan's democratic society, 1945-2004” in Cheng, T, Deborah A., Brown, (eds)) Religious organizations and democratization: case studies from contemporary Asia. Armonk, N.Y.; London: M.E. Sharpe, 109-135. Tien, H 1975, ‘Taiwan in transition: prospects for sociopolitical change’, China Quarterly 64 ; 615-644. Tien, H and Cheng, T 1997, ‘Crafting democratic institutions in Taiwan’, China Journal 37: 1-30. Tien, H and Chu, Y 1996, ‘Building democracy in Taiwan’, China Quarterly 148; 1141-1170. Copper, J 1989, ‘The evolution of political parties in Taiwan’, Asian Affairs 16/1; 3-21. Chu, J.J 1993, ‘Political liberalization and the rise of Taiwanese labor radicalism’, Journal of Contemporary Asia 23/2: 173-188. Copper, J. F 1989, ‘Taiwan: a nation in transition’, Current History 88:537; 173-176, 198-199. Laothamatas, A. (1997). Democratization in Southeast and East Asia, Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies Greene, J.M, (1999). Explaining the political democratization of Taiwan, Asian Profile, vol. 27, No 5 Read More

The group formed a movement referred to as Formosa Group (FG) that led a major confrontation with the KMT. They engaged in violent clash with the police leading to order by Chiang for arrest of the group leaders. This ended with formation of Association of Public Policy (APP) in 1984 that would coordinate their agenda for democratic reform. The opposition group became a strong political force that made Chiang to state his push for dialogue (Hu 2005, p37-38). This was followed by various initiatives by Chiang through a major decision to achieve a major political breakthrough.

He formed a 24 people committee made up of two 12 people task forces. Each committee was to look into the issues of abolishment of martial law, reforms in parliament and legalization of opposition parties. In July 1987, Chiang appointed his old friend Lee Huan as the new secretary of KMT to spearhead democracy in Taiwan. In his speech, Lee stated that KMT must not replace the communist party as this would be a violation of the principle of democracy. Even though his statement was criticized by some party members, he was supported by Chiang who instructed him to publish his speech in official journal of KMT.

Martial law was lifted by 15th July 1987. By 1st January 1988, Chiang’s government lifted all bans related to political parties as well as the freedom of press. This was a major pathway to democracy. Chiang however died twelve days later. Democratization was however pushed forward to its full success by Lee Teng-hui who took over from Chiang (Hu 2005, p43). Role of liberalization in Taiwan’s democratization Liberalization is a technique that most authoritarian engage so as to increase freedom of speech and the media.

It involves allowing the members of opposition party to win some positions in elections but they do not allow them to have full control in those positions. Political liberalization took place in Taiwan in 1986 marked by the founding of Democratic Progressive Party, an opposition party (Copper 1989, p5). This was an act of tolerance by the leadership of the KMT which also allowed DPP to participate in national, provincial and municipal elections. Liberalization was also pushed further by KMT’s relaxation of media control, release of political prisoners who had been arrested for leading protests against authoritarianism, and the amendment of legislation that had been used to suppress civil freedom.

KMT had already started democratization within the party marked by election of Central Committee members and party chairman through secret ballot in 1993. Its tolerance towards violent street protests by the opposition was a manifestation of liberalization. It is clear that a certain level of liberalization preceded democratization especially with the restructuring of political institutions to encourage participation of more citizens and elites. This paved the way for major steps that led to complete democratization (Tien 1975, 620).

One of the major steps that Chiang took towards democracy was to liberalize representation within the government. This involved appointment of liberal reformists within the leadership of KMT. This started in 1972 when he took over power from his father. He pushed for appointment of young and more educated Taiwanese to be part of his top leadership. Some of the liberal persons that he appointed include: Lee Teng-hui, a holder of PhD in agricultural economics from Cornell, George K.C Yea, a holder of Master of Arts from Cambridge University and Sun Yun-suan who had been trained in the Tennessee Valley Authority.

These three had strong reputation of being liberal leaders. Chiang also appointed Kao Yu-shu to head the ministry of transport. Kao Yu-Shu had been the Mayor of Taipei. His political career had been threatened when Taipei was elevated to provincial status by the government. His appointment by Chiang was a clear move that his government was heading towards reforms. Through these appointments, Chiang believed that this would be an indicator that his views were changing.

Read More