What exactly is the significance of the Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral elections?
This is a question of interpretation. Sometimes it needs to be viewed within a long-term framework, or scrutinized according to German sociologist Niklas Luhman's "extended causality" principle. However, many instant interpretations made for specific political purposes are neither consistent nor justifiable.
Both the pan-blue camp and the pan-blue media have long invested "special" significance in Taipei and Kaohsiung cities. Their purpose is to promote the blue camp and suppress the green, their ultimate objective being to oust President Chen Shui-bian (
If the pan-blue media's claim is valid, then why didn't anyone say in 1998 that then president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) was elevating then mayor Chen's status when Lee went out and stumped for Chen's challenger, Ma? Why didn't anyone make the city's mayoral race look like a trial match for the presidential election?
What's even more ridiculous is to view the results of Taipei and Kaohsiung mayoral elections as a vote of confidence in Chen. Of course, elections are elimination races, in which the electorate use their votes to decide who's in and who's out.
Naturally, we can say this is a vote of confidence. But in the city mayoral elections, the electorate are casting their votes of confidence in the incumbent mayors. What does it have to do with the president? Only in a presidential election can we have a vote of confidence in the president. A legislative election can also be treated as a vote of confidence in the president, but a mayoral race is only a local government election. Does it have to be pushed upward without limit? The political motivation behind such acts requires scrutiny.
If we really want to talk about a "vote of no confidence," the 2000 presidential election certainly saw a vote of no confidence in the KMT. In last year's legislative election, voters said "no" to KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Placing such spin on the matter does not make sense. The motivation behind it is quite obvious.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Francis Huang
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
After “Operation Absolute Resolve” to capture former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, the US joined Israel on Saturday last week in launching “Operation Epic Fury” to remove Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his theocratic regime leadership team. The two blitzes are widely believed to be a prelude to US President Donald Trump changing the geopolitical landscape in the Indo-Pacific region, targeting China’s rise. In the National Security Strategic report released in December last year, the Trump administration made it clear that the US would focus on “restoring American pre-eminence in the Western hemisphere,” and “competing with China economically and militarily
RSS