It is perhaps inevitable around the time of 228 Memorial Day that there is discussion of Taiwan's ethnic divisions and problems. This year it has been exacerbated by the presidential election. In the current atmosphere, where both sides see this election as make or break, the only thing that is surprising is that ethnic enmities haven't made their baleful influence felt more fully.
One of the interesting facts about ethnic campaigning in Taiwan is that it is always the pan-blues who speak out most loudly against it while they also benefit the most from ethnically motivated voting. The overwhelming majority of Mainlanders are pan-blue "iron votes." The pan-blues have always used ethnic campaigning to reinforce this by playing up a siege mentality among the Mainlanders, frightening them with tales of what a vengeful Hoklo-dominated Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would do were it elected -- remember the canard about canceling veterans' pensions?
And yet while the pan-blues promote ethnic voting among their core constituency, they also denounce it elsewhere. This is for the obvious reason that the pan-blues cannot get elected on Mainlander votes alone -- there simply aren't enough of them. So the pan-blues manage to have their ethnic cake and eat it. They play on ethnic fears to keep Mainlanders loyal and denounce ethnic campaigning to win over Taiwanese votes.
This is not to say that the DPP is without fault. Partly because of its origins as a party of the Hoklo gentry deprived of its political rights by Mainlander incomers, its recognition of the rights of other ethnic groups has been patchy. Only since the DPP became the governing party has it obviously reached out to Hakka voters, and its relationship to Aborigines is still far from ideal.
Nevertheless, given that the DPP obviously can win an election on Hoklo votes alone, it has been remarkably restrained. What could be easier than a campaign based on "Taiwanese should not vote for Chinese"? Yet there has been none of this in the election campaign so far. It is ironic that though it is the DPP that practices restraint when playing the ethnic card, it is the pan-blues who make most of the criticism.
It was interesting to hear that one of the pillars of Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman (KMT) Lien Chan's (
What this should be was symbolized by the 228 Hand-in-Hand rally on Saturday and, successful as that rally was in bolstering President Chen Shui-bian's (
Turning your back on China and turning toward the opportunity that for 300 years Taiwan has represented -- that is a pretty good definition of what it means to be a New Taiwanese. It is hard, however, to imagine Lien embracing such a concept.
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
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS