Since the US-Iraq war broke out, Taiwan's green and blue camps have turned into pro-US and pro-China factions respectively. They are now engaging in a "saliva war" almost as vehement as the war in Iraq. Unfortunately, the opposition camp is stopping at nothing to humiliate Chen Shui-bian's (
On the legislative floor, pan-blue legislators are hurling abuse at Chen for his support of the US war in Iraq, calling him a "toady of the Americans" and a "child-emperor." Although Chen's remarks have hardly been inappropriate, the opposition lawmakers overstepped the bounds of propriety with their insulting accusations. Such vitriol will not win any sympathy from the public. Taiwan now has freedom of speech, but the people of this country did not give their lawmakers the power to insult or vilify their president under any pretext. The opposition parties should seriously question and debate government policies instead of gossiping about the president's private affairs on the legislative floor. Such unwarranted abuse of the interpellation sessions simply turns the legislature into a national rumor mill.
Before the war broke out in Iraq, we heard Democratic members of the US Congress fiercely opposing Us president George W. Bush's plan to take military action. However, US Democrats never mounted a personal attack on their president or resorted to character assassination, no matter how much they disagreed with Bush. That's because they know that using their official power to humiliate the president is the equivalent of being disloyal to their country. Unless they are in fact loyal to another country, representatives of the people should not do that.
If more than one opposition lawmaker publicly claims on the floor of the legislature that their own president is the son of the US "emperor" and a lackey of the Americans, how can they also claim to respect the choices of the people of Taiwan? Was not the president democratically elected by the people of Taiwan? Such talk gives one the impression that these legislators would rather give their loyalty to another country and another head of state.
Everyone knows that next year's presidential election is drawing near. The chairman of the KMT, which was ousted from power only three years ago, and the chairman of the PFP, who narrowly lost the election at that same time, are now setting their sights on the posts of president and vice president. They are vowing to bring another transition of political power to Taiwan. From the perspective of democratic politics, everyone will accept the ultimate choice of the majority of the electorate. But we would like to ask the opposition parties not to be so base. It might give people the impression that the opposition is trying to assume power by trampling on the basic principles of democratic politics by defaming their political opponents.
We know that the Taiwanese electorate is not stupid. In the previous legislative elections, the voters dumped a large number of politicians who abused their power trying to humiliate and tarnish the head of state. This should have served as a valuable lesson to the opposition camp. We hope to see the KMT and the PFP play their appropriate role as opposition and show loyalty to their country, instead of siding with the regime in Beijing on every issue -- mere happenstance, to be sure -- and insulting their country's president.
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