Taiwan’s presidential election this week will have greater significance after Kuomingtang’s landslide victory in January’s legislative elections. This election has enormous importance because it sets the stage for Taiwan’s future.

The KMT candidate, Ma Ying-jeou, is a 58-year-old former mayor of Taipei City and erstwhile chairman of the KMT. His principal campaign strategy is to argue he is “clean and has always been clean,” a direct reference to the corruption that has plagued President Chen and his Democratic Progressive Party.

On the economic front, Mr. Ma contends he will broaden the base of economic development by encouraging direct flights between Taiwan and the mainland, loosen restrictions on investment, and begin an era of expanded trade negotiations across the Taiwan Strait.

His basic policy vis-à-vis China is the reiteration of the “three nos”: no unification, no independence, and no use of force, a position consistent with Taiwan’s past. However, Mr. Ma has consistently chided the DPP for its reference, however oblique, to independence. Emphasizing this campaign theme, Mr. Ma calls the DPP position “playing with fire.”

The DPP candidate, Frank Hsieh, is a 62-year-old former mayor of Kaohsiung City, Taiwan’s second largest city. Like his rival, he is also a former chairman of his party. He describes his campaign as a Taiwanese reformation based on creating a “happy economy” — presumably policies that make people happy.

On the economic front, he is eager to create a hospitable environment for manufacturers to remain in Taiwan, instead of relocating to the mainland, and he is encouraging of companies on the mainland to return to Taiwan.

As far as cross-strait relations are concerned, Mr. Hsieh maintains that Taiwan must deepen its democracy and consolidate its sovereign independence as first steps for further negotiation “If people here are not able to agree that Taiwan is an independent sovereignty then Taiwan cannot have national security and it would be difficult for Taiwan to survive,” he notes. He is a leading advocate for “the U.N. for Taiwan” referendum as a way, he maintains, to overcome international isolation.

On the surface the difference between the parties seems pettifogging. It is exactly these less obvious nuances of the candidates’ positions that count. Mr. Ma and the KMT are eager to restore Kumoningtang’s traditional dominance on the island. After all, this is the party of Sun Yat Sen and Chiang Kai Shek. A younger generation has long forgotten Chiang’s stranglehold on all aspects of Taiwan’s political and economic life. Nor are they likely to recall the imposition of martial law.

Older members of the KMT remember Chiang as a martyr who saved the Republic of China from destruction at the hands of Chairman Mao and his communist forces. They view this presidential contest as a form of restoration. Additionally, their view is that the DPP, filled with nationalistic sentiment, has been unnecessarily provocative in its emphasis on independence.

The DPP is the party that introduced democracy to Taiwan. It sees itself as the champion of a new invigorated nation that does not have to subordinate itself in order to appease China. For most DPP members, Chiang Kai Shek does not warrant admiration since, as they see it, he stifled democracy, promoted authoritarianism, and created a personality cult. It is not surprising that the DPP antipathy to Chiang was manifest in the replacement of one of his statues at the Chiang Memorial Center, now renamed the Center for Democracy.

What is at stake in this election is as much an interpretation of the past as a prediction of the future. Can the KMT resurrect the Chiang legacy? Does the deepening of democracy depend on a reinterpretation of the past? And which party is best prepared to engage in cross-straits negotiation?

In Taiwan much of the current presidential debate is based on ineffable cues. It would be helpful to remember the past, but which part is the question. In the end, Taiwan requires solidarity to deal with the challenges that lie ahead. Unfortunately it is impossible to determine whether this presidential election will unify the nation or cause it to fracture.

Mr. London, president of the Hudson Institute and professor emeritus of New York University, is the author of “Decade of Denial.”