Legislative Yuan Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
Wang's remarks come as a surprise. It is the first time the pan-blue camp has shown a shift toward independence.
We do not know whether Wang received approval from the campaign headquarters to make these remarks, but his proposal is not so sudden, given that PFP Legislator Liu Sung-pan (
The problem is this: the alliance has presented neither measures to accomplish this nor a gradually progressive schedule, and so the public is confused.
But the KMT has not changed its name, KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
So, has the KMT-PFP alliance made an ideological U-turn, or is Wang presenting this strategy in an attempt to "save the nation from extinction?"
For the majority of people, KMT support of independence is beyond their imagination. From 1949, when Chiang Kai-shek (
Though former president Lee Teng-hui (
Returning to the KMT's "legally constituted authority," Lien presented the rule of Chiang Ching-kuo to demonstrate the party's sinicization and, at the same time, rejected the political path Lee had followed for 12 years.
Now, only 90 days away from the presidential election, Wang said that the KMT-PFP alliance would no longer mention the so-called "1992 consensus" and the notion of "one China, with each side making its own interpretation." Contradicting the past, he even said that the party "has never refuted the `one country on either side' platform."
In response, Lien said "this is Wang's personal opinion," indicating that the KMT's party platform is unchanged. If the KMT were to recognize the legality and rationality of independence, it actually has much to do.
For instance, the Guidelines for National Unification in the party platform should be scrapped, and Lien's stance that "one China is the Republic of China" must be changed. More importantly, the KMT-PFP version of the Referendum Law (
In view of this, even if we brush aside the question of whether Wang's "personal opinion" can benefit the pan-blue camp's election campaign, he might have placed a time bomb in their midst. It is worth observing whether this will do them more harm than good.
Chin Heng-wei is editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly.
Translated by Jackie Lin
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