Search results

This article analyzes the implementation of anti-corruption reforms in Taiwan by two former presidents, Chen Shui-bian (2000-2008) and Ma Ying-jeou (2008-2016).

A three-tier research approach, including in-depth interviews, questionnaire survey, and descriptive and inferential analysis, is adopted. In addition to Chen and Ma, 11 senior anti-corruption officials who served under both presidents were interviewed by the author. The survey questions cover 12 factors which are later grouped into the five dimensions of ethical leadership, considerate leadership, delegating leadership, participatory leadership, and performance to illustrate the causal relationship between these dimensions and performance.

Ma’s personal ethics are distinct from Chen’s in kind but Ma’s overall leadership and performance outshine Chen’s in degree rather than in kind. While the gap of ethical leadership between two Taiwan presidents is significantly wider than other dimensions of leadership, the outcome of the national integrity is not proportionate to the ethical leadership gap. In other words, personal ethics are not automatically transformed into political will for enhancing anti-corruption effectiveness. Three popular forms of corruption, red envelopes (bribing), influence-peddling, and vote-buying are analyzed in the context of changing political culture through national leadership. Unfortunately, both Chen and Ma produce insignificant contributions based on public surveys.

Policy-makers and scholars can use these research findings to further explore how ethical leadership can enhance a country’s anti-corruption performance.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how the USA seeks to promote its interests in peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait in the context of Taiwan’s unique political status and its democratic system.

A narrative analysis examines the recent history of Taiwan’s democratic development and USA responses to it.

The USA has responded in various ways to the dilemma of respecting the outcomes of elections in friendly democracies while protecting its own interests in peace and security. This was easy during the Ma Ying-jeou administration (2008-2016) but it is likely to become more difficult following Taiwan’s presidential election in January 2016.

This study draws on personal experience and an in-depth understanding of Taiwan politics and US diplomacy.

After Ma Yingjeou's re‐election in 2012, Mainland China and Taiwan will continue cooperation in economic fields. The purpose of this paper is to undertake research on a bilateral investment agreement (BIA) between Mainland China and Taiwan.

The paper uses statistics to demonstrate the growing cross‐strait investment and incompetent contemporary investment protection mechanisms in Mainland China and Taiwan. The paper also compares laws in Mainland China and Taiwan and the investment protection agreements concluded by Mainland and Taiwan with other countries, respectively.

Based on the similarities of current laws and the investment protection agreements concluded by Mainland China and Taiwan with other countries, respectively, Mainland China and Taiwan can possibility agree upon major provisions of a BIA. Solutions are provided to both macro and micro challenges against a successful BIA.

It is hard to predict whether the BIA will promote political integration between Mainland China and Taiwan in the near future.

A BIA can boost investors' confidence.

This paper may serve as a humble reference for both the Mainland China and Taiwan government when negotiating the BIA.

Cross‐strait investment is an important and prosperous field in practice, but has not been fully explored in literature thus far. This Article aims to fill this gap.

In his autobiography, Chen Shui-bian (1999, p. 40) condemned the Koumintang's (KMT's) corruption and praised the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for being free from money politics and corruption. The DPP fought the 1992 Legislative Yuan election campaign effectively on an anticorruption platform and used the same strategy in subsequent elections. If Chen Shui-bian had criticized the KMT for its involvement with “black gold” politics and had won the 2000 presidential election on his anticorruption platform, why was he and his family found guilty of corruption after his second term of office? The short answer is that even though he had promised to curb corruption, President Chen himself had succumbed to corruption after assuming office. In June 2002, Keesing's Contemporary Archives cited a poll in Taiwan that indicated that more respondents had perceived the DPP to be more corrupt than the KMT (Copper, 2006, p. 14).

The purpose of this paper is to explain how post-1997 Hong Kong has been perceived in Taiwan and to critically evaluate the demonstration effects of Hong Kong under the “One Country, Two Systems” policy on cross-strait relations.

“Today’s Hong Kong, Tomorrow’s Taiwan” has become a dominant discourse in cross-strait relations in recent years. The paper has adopted discourse analysis of selected texts during and after the 2014 Sunflower Movement to elucidate the disapproval of the developments of post-handover Hong Kong and the construction of the Movement’s self-identity.

It has observed the following arguments which shaped the prevailing perceptions among critics of the “One Country, Two Systems” policy: political infiltration of China in Hong Kong could be extended to Taiwan in the sense that the Beijing authorities would adopt the identical approach to manipulate Taiwan through the cross-strait trading agreements; negative perceptions and images of China and Chinese capitals as a collective aggressor and a threat, raising fear and worries in both Hong Kong and Taiwan; and Kuomintang, as a ruling party at that time under the leadership of President Ma Ying-jeoh, was dismissed by protesters as an incompetent gatekeeper and defender of Taiwan’s interests.

The pervasive sentiments and perceptions about post-1997 Hong Kong has been articulated discursively by the young activists in Taiwan and Hong Kong into a statement – “Today’s Hong Kong, Tomorrow’s Taiwan” – which has brought about a somewhat unexpected bonding effect between Hong Kong and Taiwan through a strong disapproval of “One Country, Two Systems” and the China factor, which has be reproduced, delivered and circulated in both societies since 2014.