The Liberal Democratic Kuomintang Party, or the LKDMPT

It's easy to look at Japan's Liberal Democratic Party 自由民主党 and Taiwan's Kuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party) 中國國民黨, and be tempted to put them together in the same basket. After all, both have ruled their countries for lengthy periods - in the LDP's case, from 1955 until yesterday's historic election (with the exception of a nine-month break from 1993-1994), while the KMT reigned over Taiwan from 1949 (or 1945, depending on how you want to calculate it) until 2000, and then again from last year's presidential election. And it's true that both are riddled with corruption, and have strong ties with gangster elements (as well as the 右翼 in the LDP's case). But in actuality the political, cultural and historical circumstances are very different between Japan and Taiwan, and it's somewhat unfair to the LDP to have itself compared with the likes of the KMT.

The LDP was born of a merger between two conservative parties in the mid-1950's, the Liberals 自由党 and the Democrats 日本民主党. As such, it has never had an all-encompassing goal or ideology, unlike the Kuomintang, with its initial desire to "retake the (Chinese) mainland" and its present effort to return Taiwan to the Chinese fold and thwart Taiwanese independence drives. Rather, the LDP has always been a collection of factions held together by the prospect of power. In fact, in the old days of Japan's multi-member electoral districts, party members competed against themselves more often than they did against candidates from opposition parties. Unlike the KMT, the LDP has never considered itself a part of the fabric of the state - the Japanese nation/state has existed long before there were Liberal Democrats, quite the opposite from the Republic of China 中華民國, which owes its continuing existence to the KMT (and vice versa).

The biggest difference between the two parties, however, is how they managed to stay in power for so long. For the KMT, this meant the imposition of martial law until 1987. Political opponents were imprisoned, tortured and executed in great numbers during the years of the White Terror. After Taiwan's democratization, the KMT was able to remain in control thanks to its deep penetration into local political structures (unlike in Japan, where politics at the local level is organized quite differently). The Democratic Progressive Party 民主進步黨 was only able to win the presidency in 2000 thanks to a split in the Blue camp, and barely won the 2004 race. The KMT refused to accept its new status at the opposition party, and attempted to destabilize the DPP government through impeachment attempts, legislative stonewalling, violent street demonstrations and backroom negotiations with the Chinese Communist Party 中国共产党, finally regaining the presidency in 2008 (and is now in the process of using any and all means at its disposal, constitutional and otherwise, to ensure it remains in power in the future, but that's another story).

It is true that the LDP benefited in the past from an electoral system that gave a disproportionate share of votes to rural districts (a traditional bastion of support for the Liberal Democrats), not to mention an ineffective opposition (meaning for a long time, the Socialists 日本社会党, who seemed to be content being the permanent Opposition). The main reason, however, for the LDP's long ride in the saddle was quite simply that it delivered the goods, economically speaking, from the end of the Korean War to the bursting of the bubble economy バブル経済 at the start of the 1990's. Japanese voters always had the opportunity to remove the Liberal Democrats from power, but chose not to do so, as long as incomes were rising and affluence was increasing. It was only when the economy began to stagnate that they turned against the LDP. The LDP was out of power for a nine-month period in the early Nineties, and had only been able to stay in control since then by forming coalitions (including with the Socialists at one point!), with the 2005 election being an anomaly due to Junichirō Koizumi's 小泉純一郎 personal popularity. When the end came, staring with the loss of the upper house 参議院 of the Diet 国会 in 2007, and followed by yesterday's annihilation at the polls, the LDP bowed out more or less gracefully, as any mature political party should. Say what you will about the Liberal Democrats, for all their faults, they have generally played by the electoral rules and followed the democratic process.

It's often forgotten that Japan had the only democratic political system in place in East and Southeast Asia from the end of the Second World War until the late 1980's. For all its faults and abuses of power, one shouldn't overlook the contribution made by the Liberal Democrats to Japan's postwar political development and yesterday's possible birth of a true two-party system. It's unfortunate that there are few, if any, lessons to be learned, or conclusions to be drawn, from what happened to the LDP on Sunday in regards to the current state of politics in Taiwan.

One for Sunday

It only stands to reason that a bi-cultural kid would have a bi-cultural appetite:

Amber's on top of the world (or at least Fengyuan)

The best thing about my wife returning to full-time employment is that it removed the financial necessity of my having to work on Saturdays. Not only do I now have a proper weekend, I can use the time now to do things with my daughter. Like this afternoon, for example. Amber and I went to Chung-cheng Park to do some hiking, followed by some playground time and fish feeding. Before setting out on the trails, we had a fine lunch of rice balls おにぎり, guava and rice crackers 煎餅...

...while the park's namesake, the brilliant warlord/vanquisher of Communists/Generalissimo/stern father-figure himself, Chiang Kai-shek 蔣中正, maintained his alert vigilance over the basketball courts:

It was something of a haul for Amber to walk up to the top of the hill behind old Peanut, but she never gave up. The highlight for her going up had to be saving a caterpillar from getting bitten to death by a swarm of ants. Here's Amber celebrating the successful ascent ("I did it!"), and the view overlooking Fengyuan 豐原 down below:

After a short walk along the top of the ridge, we came to another trail leading down. For the descent, I strapped Amber into the child carrier and carried her back down to the General. A good thing too, for it started to rain halfway down, and we came close to getting soaked by the time we reached our car. Unfortunately, the change in the weather meant Amber couldn't spend time on the playground or feed the fish in the park's ponds, but she still seemed happy with the hike. Hopefully next time we can do it all!

And now for something completely different, the Japan Times ジャパンタイムズ had a Kyōdō News 共同通信社 follow-up article to a story earlier in the week on the final report being issued on the China Airlines Naha Airport fire チャイナエアライン１２０便炎上事故 two years ago. According to "Naha jet fire laid to faulty maintenance", the blame has been placed equally on Boeing and China Airlines 中華航空:

"...the Japan Transport Safety Board 運輸安全委員会 concluded the explosion was caused by a maintenance error that caused a bolt to fall off the aircraft's main wing and pierce a fuel tank, causing fuel to gush through the hole and catch fire. Pointing the finger at the insufficient steps taken to prevent such an occurrence by manufacturer Boeing Co. and by the airline, which was responsible for maintenance, the board asked the Federal Aviation Administration and Taiwan's aviation authority to make sure the two firms act to prevent a recurrence...The bolt installed in a support pylon of a slat on the leading edge of the right wing fell off due to vibration because it was fixed only by a nut and not backed up by a washer, according to the report. The bolt then pierced the fuel tank when the slat was tucked into the wing and forced it into the tank with considerable force, it said. The board believes China Airlines mechanics failed to attach a washer when they replaced the nut on July 6, 2007, about six weeks before the accident, at the instruction of Boeing, which has since modified the design of the nut, enlarging it to make it more effective in preventing the bolt from detaching."

グレイトフル・デッド？

I went for a walk in the Hsint'ien 新田 area at noontime today. I worked up a good sweat in a short period of time, but overall it was an unremarkable, though pleasant, outing (I only saw one other person on the trails). Afterward, on the way back, for some reason I stopped at some graves by the roadside. In general, Taiwanese are scared of cemeteries and avoid them at all times, with the exception of a national holiday known as Tomb Sweeping Day 清明節, when families are supposed to clear away all the brush that has grown up around the gravesites of their ancestors. The result of this aversion to the places of the dead is that cemeteries are usually in a semi-wild state most of the time, at least until the next April 4 or 5 rolls around. Occasionally, however, you come across graves that are kept in near-pristine conditions, and this is probably what caught my eye this afternoon:

In all likelihood, this is one large family plot. At least that's what my wife thinks, who was obviously uncomfortable when I asked her about the writing on the steles (stelea?). The tomb in the upper left corner was particularly well-tended. There appeared to be a small crypt with locked screen doors on both the left and right-hand sides. Inside could be seen brooms, suggesting that someone comes by regularly to clean up the site (there was no trash on the ground, and the lawn behind the tomb looked healthy).

Like many cemeteries in Taiwan, these graves were located on the side of a mountain, with nice views overlooking the town of T'antzu 潭子 (or what would be nice views if the weather hadn't been so hazy today). While the living cram themselves into densely populated urban areas, the dead are given what would be prime real estate back in the U.S. Yet another aspect of Taiwan I don't think I'll ever understand.

Ch'aputo (差不多) Airlines

It isn't difficult to take potshots or poke fun at Taiwan's state air carrier, China Airlines 中華航空. According to its Wikipedia entry, the company has 6.44 fatal events per million flights, compared with a worldwide average of less than 2.0. The most recent incident occurred on August 20, 2007 at Naha Airport 那覇空港 in Okinawa 沖縄 when Flight 120 caught fire shortly after landing 中華航空120號班機事故/ チャイナエアライン１２０便炎上事故. You can read about the incident here, and watch the video below:

https://youtu.be/-qyZFASOAe0

It was fortunate that there were no deaths. Now, a little over two years later, the Japan Times ジャパンタイムズ is running a Kyōdō News 共同通信社 article on the final report into the accident ("China Air fire yields new rules for repairs"):

"The Japan Transport Safety Board 運輸安全委員会 plans to issue a safety recommendation to the U.S. aviation administration over a Boeing aircraft explosion in Okinawa in 2007, saying the manufacturer failed to warn airlines about preventing the maintenance error that caused the accident...A similar recommendation is planned for the Taiwan aviation administration because Japan's safety board believes China Air also did not formulate sufficient maintenance instruction manuals to prevent errors...In its final report on the accident to be released as early as this week, the board will say the explosion of the China Air jetliner at Naha airport was caused by a bolt that detached from an assembly on the right wing and pierced a fuel tank, causing fuel to gush through the hole and catch fire. The board has also concluded the Taiwanese carrier failed to put a washer on the bolt during maintenance a month before the accident, while Boeing failed to notify airlines of the dangers of forgetting the washers."

Whether or not the people running China Airlines act on these suggestions is a good question. I've flown on the airline on a couple of occasions and actually enjoyed the flights, but that safety record is worrisome. On the other hand, EVA Air 長榮航空 has a spotless safety record (so far) when it comes to crashes and deaths, so hopefully all is not "almost is close enough" in Taiwan's aviation industry.

You don't say?

It isn't hard to find badly-written analyses of developments in Taiwan by ill-informed Westerners (not that I know what I'm talking about, either), but one of the most clueless has to be Tom Plate. In his latest commentary to be carried in the Japan Times ジャパンタイムズ, "Scrutinizing the Chinese threat to Taiwan", Plate surprising gets it right...almost. The first half of his analysis starts off well, summarizing a RAND Corporation report entitled "A Question of Balance: Political Context and Military Aspects of the China-Taiwan Dispute":

"Their report, concludes that 'while the relationship between Beijing 北京 and T'aipei台北 is more stable in 2009 than it has been in years, it is not clear that this honeymoon will last forever. China has not renounced its "right" to use force to forestall Taiwan's "independence," nor discussed amending its anti-secession law 反分裂国家法, nor withdrawn any missiles from the hundreds it points at Taiwan.' At the same time, the report also concludes, the cross-strait military balance is shifting in ways that are problematic for Taiwan's defense: The growing size and quality of China's missile arsenal, along with other advances in Chinese military capabilities, call into question America's and Taiwan's ability to defend the island against a large-scale Chinese attack. This is RAND's nice way of putting it. The un-nice way: If China decided that the only way to annex Taiwan as a kind of Hong Kong 香港 is through invasion, what or who's to stop it? Over the years, the economically surging mainland has built up its short- range missile arsenal to the point where it could, in one terrific blinding strike, wipe out every Taiwan runway. And its air force now has the strength to neutralize Taiwan's...The report is alarming but not alarmist. Prudently worded, it points out that attacking Taiwan would be a lot easier for China than sustaining a land invasion to occupy it...The RAND team points out that the Chinese military buildup is a big threat to U.S. bases in Japan. 'The danger...is sufficiently grave that a credible case can be made that the air war for Taiwan could essentially be over before much of the ("good guy") air forces have even fired a shot.'"

Where Plate fumbles the ball, as he always does, is when he lets his admiration for Ma Ying-jeou 馬英九, whom he has variously described in the past as being "handsome", "suave" and "debonair", cloud his interpretation of the threat facing Taiwan:

"(The report) rightly points to the good work of Taiwan's current president, Ma Ying-jeou, elected just last year, to calm Beijing's fears about formal, assertive Taiwan separatism. But skillful as he so far seems, Ma is walking a fine line. Few people in Taiwan would be joyous about formal integration into China, whether politely negotiated Hong Kong-style or through a smash-mouth military takeover. But Ma has been making progress; his effort aims to provide for Taiwan's economic gain without giving away the sovereignty store. Whether the mainland government can remain full of saintly patience while Ma does his gradual thing is a big question."

The truth is that RAND's analysts probably shouldn't waste too much ink writing about China's military threat as the Ma administration has been laying the groundwork for Taiwan to become gradually absorbed into Greater China without the need for shots being fired. This is being accomplished through conscious efforts by government officials to downgrade Taiwan's sovereignty (and at the same time put some distance between Taiwan and Japan), combined with the progress being made to tie Taiwan ever closer economically to China. The thing with Plate is that he doesn't seem to mind. Notice how he doesn't condemn Ma for moving Taiwan closer to the Chinese, but instead describes it as being the correct thing to do. While decrying China's military intimidation, he appears to welcome "reunification". Unfortunately, Plate overlooks what this would mean to the people of Taiwan in the long run - an end to free speech and democracy, and a return to an authoritarian governing system and a police state. He also seems oblivious to what the effect would be on the rest of Asia should Taiwan be "returned to the bosom of the motherland". For a country that promotes aggressive nationalism among its people at home, and has territorial claims to the Senkaku 尖閣諸島, Paracel and Spratly Islands (not to mention historical assertions about the Goguryeo kingdom 고구려 - see the Northeast Project 东北工程 and Goguryeo controversies), Taiwan has the potential to be an unsinkable aircraft carrier, a fact that should keep policymakers from Seoul to Hanoi (not to mention Washington, D.C.) awake at nights.

As for Tom Plate, he really should accept the fact that Ma is already married, get over the crush he has on the man, and limit his geopolitical analyses to the area of Westwood around the UCLA campus.

Amber does Hōkō

We went into T'aichung 台中 this afternoon to take Amber to her weekly swimming class.

  

The video below was taken at the Fengchia night market 逢甲夜市, where we headed for dinner after Amber's lesson. Walking through Fengchia brings to life virtually every stereotype of Asian street markets - the elbow-to-elbow crowds, the bright lights, the incessant noise, the smells (enticing and otherwise) and the inconsiderate scooter and motorcycle riders forcing their way through. About the only thing missing was amputee beggars. Here's a video I made of our walk from the teppanyaki 鉄板焼き restaurant where we ate to the chicken feet vendor that turned out to be the main reason why my wife suggested going to Fengchia in the first place (I was looking for Taichung's only Burger King outlet, but couldn't find it):

Amber and I at the end of our quiet, contemplative stroll through the quaint village of Fengchia: