The pan-blues do not care about Taiwan. They care only about attaining power, and their misconceived dreams of grandeur endanger the survival of Taiwan as an independent and democratic state.
Depending on your point of view, the chaotic dissonance of the pan-blues' policy statements has been either intensely amusing or deeply depressing. What their statements have not been is coherent and practical.
Most worrying of all are the deep ideological rifts between Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Should this mismatched duo become responsible for anything more consequential than making a photocopy, it will be disastrous. And I would suggest letting one of their colleagues use the copy machine. Maybe Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
In any event, the rift is increasingly evident, and the hackneyed attempts at papering over the lack of consensus simply highlight the dysfunction of the pan-blue alliance. Consider the statements made by Lien and Soong regarding the nationwide referendum.
Lien tells us that he will not take part in the ballot, but will respect the people's choice in the matter. This well-planned policy stance appears to embrace all the philosophical elements of "well, I dunno, so, you know, uhhh ... whatever."
Meanwhile, Soong says the "illegal" referendum should never take place, and it would be better to ignore it altogether. Of course, it has never occurred to Soong that instead of throwing a tantrum ("I don't wanna play referendum"), he would do well to propose an alternative solution to the issues involved. But that would require forethought and a belief system, instead of mere malignant opportunism.
Of greater import is the inability of Lien and Soong to share an opinion about how to deal with China. Lien calls for a "confederation" and says that Taiwan ought to just focus on economic integration with China, leaving the "political" cross-strait issues to future generations. Does Lien actually believe that politics and economics have nothing to do with each other?
Then, Soong calls for "one China under one roof," buying into the intellectually bankrupt and historically inaccurate pan-Chinese nationalist uberkultur myth.
What "one roof" would mean in practice isn't clear (Does it mean one government? One leader? Perhaps an actual Great Roof, to accompany the Great Wall?). But certainly what "one China under one roof" means for Taiwan is not political autonomy.
So how will the KMT-PFP reconcile these positions if they attain power?
What will they actually do about the threat from China?
Pretending that the Chinese are not expanding their missile forces and overall military capabilities in order to force a solution to the "Taiwan issue" on terms favorable to Beijing is irresponsible.
Were it not for the possibility the pan-blues could win the election, it would be easy to mock the disjointed and nonsensical campaign strategies employed by the KMT-PFP alliance. The "313 Rally" is an especially fitting symbol for the pan-blues.
Some people might wonder why the KMT-PFP chose today for their counter-rally.
A close reading of Taiwan's history will clarify this matter immediately. The rally will be held on the important and auspicious date of March 13 because ... it's a Saturday.
And what does the KMT tell us we will celebrate on this, our most revered last Saturday before the presidential election?
Well, anti-black-gold, of course. It's an anti-black-gold rally. It's anti-black-gold Saturday.
Apparently they were so flustered by the success of the 228 Hand-in-Hand Rally the pan-blues thought their best move was to throw together their own rally around a generally inoffensive theme. In a stunning display of political acumen, they never considered that the DPP would then simply say "Hey, we're against corruption, too. See you on Saturday!"
This is precisely what the DPP did.
So the KMT-PFP had to change tactics again.
The organizer of the pan-blues' election campaign, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
Quite a subtle message, really.
So now the DPP can't take part. Brilliant.
There is a colloquial American term that applies to the pan-blues' planning. It is "piss poor."
If the pan-blues can't even manage a pep rally, how can they run a country?
And equally important, if Lien and Soong are thrown into a panic because of a peace rally, what would they do if there was a real crisis in cross-strait relations?
Mac William Bishop is a political commentator based in Taipei.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS