Dresner on Korea and Taiwan

Jonathan Dresner wrote an interesting article on HNN which talks about democracy in Korea and Taiwan. In a later posting on Cliopatria he lists three “landmark moments” for democracy (first transfer of power to the opposition, first peaceful transfer of power to another party, resolution of first major constitutional crisis) and says Taiwan is struggling with both 2 and 3. A few thoughts below…

I don’t really know how important these “landmark moments” are. The transfer of political power from one party to the next, and then the next, is a far cry from sufficient conditions to declare a mature democracy. This is not a major point though, and I believe he is more focused on the need to maintain a democracy, once achieved. This is important, and something we should all remind ourselves of from time to time. Dresner also makes some important points, both in his article and later posting, on the role of the judiciary in resolving crises in Korea, Taiwan, and the 2000 US election, and on the importance of monitoring the processes of democracy. I was, however, a little surprised to see him say,

“I’m much more confident about Korea’s successful passage through crisis than Taiwan’s. Korea’s democracy is more mature: the impeachment, though disruptive, seems to be proceeding along clear procedural lines, though they are having to make up a few things, like how to treat presidential testimony at the Constitutional Court, as they go along. Taiwan’s democracy is less well developed, which is exacerbated by the scrutiny it gets from mainland China, aka the People’s Republic of China.”

While I might be persuaded that Korea is a more mature democracy, I think this is far from obvious. Granted, Taiwan’s politics still has a “wild west” feel to it, and there is widespread anger at the lack of substantial debate on domestic economic and social issues during the past campaign. I think he is also right in noting that the current post-election turmoil in Taiwan is hardly good for its democratic development. I would argue, however, that Taiwan has a very mature democratic “consciousness” and an extremely lively and colorful media (I will be posting more on this when I get my notes together) which also need to be mentioned.

In the aftermath of the recent election, no one missed the irony of the fact that the former authoritarian KMT party found itself protesting in the streets for “democracy”, “truth” and “justice” and the “voice of the people.” President Chen Shui-bian offered his sympathy to them, noting that he had been protesting in the same place for decades. Whatever destabilizing effects this has had, the language and rhetoric of the protests were all deeply connected to the legitimacy of democratic processes. Except for those lamenting the drop in the stock market, I didn’t often hear those favorite words of “sacrifice”, “stability” and “growth” which were the hallmarks of authoritarian rhetoric. The protests were more like Japanese street festivals, with free drinks and snacks (and free ponchos when it rained!) being offered in canopies along the side. They were almost totally nonviolent. Even the riot fences and lines were a joke, we walked through them to the other side on two separate protest days. My friend Tianan, who spent some of his recent military service as a riot police officer, tells me things that in Korean protests, things are still occasionally quite violent, though perhaps not as much as the 80s. Also, I remember seeing a survey from Korea (can’t remember the source) from just a few years ago in which a surprisingly large number of respondents look back fondly on the days of the dictator Park Chunghee (박정희). I would be interested in seeing a similar poll from Taiwan (and an updated one for Korea).

Dresner also says Taiwan’s democracy being less developed is “exacerbated” by the scrutiny from the mainland. However, I would argue that for Taiwan, the looming presence of China is, if anything, now a major motivation for the island to be as pronouncedly democratic as possible. The contrast helps them distinguish themselves from the mainland regime and thereby adds to their justification for status quo or independence.

Finally, I would argue that Taiwan’s parties are much more well developed than those in Korea. The DPP has without a doubt made a successful transition from a machine of protest and opposition to a party which is becoming more experienced with the dealings of bureaucratic and political nature. A friend of mine who is a KMT supporter but works closely with DPP leaders in his position as a bureaucrat admits marked improvement over the past few years. Korea’s mostly short lived political parties are infamous for revolving around personalities, who often ditch the party for a new one. Transfer from one party to the next is thus not the best marker of its democratic maturity. Indeed, when Roh left the MDP, we had a kind of transfer of power from one former opposition party to the next without even having an election.