How on earth did we get here? After 16 years of peaceful political transformation how did we get to the stage where President Chen Shui-bian (
First, the government deserves credit for its handling of the situation. It must have been tempting to call off the election, given yesterday's events. But this would only further increase the pressure cooker-like atmosphere that has been building up in the last few days, making more violence possible if not inevitable. When bullets start flying it is as well to get people off the streets as quickly as possible. Going ahead with the election was the best way to do this.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was also wise to call off its campaigning for last night. With Chen and Lu in hospital, it might have seemed to have little choice. But the party could have fielded any number of major figures, including respected figures not in themselves politicians such has Nobel Laureate Lee Yuan-tseh (
The plan-blue campaign followed suit, for continuing to campaign while Chen and Lu lay in hospital would have been a solecism too far for the nation's voters.
So far, so responsible. But there were less edifying aspects in some reactions as well. Some pan-blues were quick to try to paint the act as something performed by the DPP in desperation to try to win on a sympathy vote. This was not only as contemptible as anything we have got used to expecting from the pan-blues but it was also amazingly stupid. As the pan-blues, those masters of political deception, know, if you want to create an incident you have a man waving a gun shooting into nowhere. You do not shoot your leader in the stomach.
The irony of yesterday's events is perhaps to show that the ultimate danger to Taiwan is not, pace Chen, China's 500 missiles. Rather it is the vicious political climate in which bitter antagonism has become the norm, with extremism, and extremist violence, the inevitable result.
It is not unjust to accuse one political faction of exacerbating this atmosphere more than another; it is simply a statement of fact. The pan-blues have never been able to accept losing the 2000 election and losing power; they have been deliberately obstructive toward measures necessary for the health of the country, for no other reason than that they refuse to work with the DPP. They have not merely criticized the DPP and government as any opposition worth its salt has to do, but they have become masters of the libelous slur, often sexual in nature, against which an inadequate legal system gives no protection.
What has been fostered in fact is a cult of irrational opposition. It is also a cult of desperate opposition. The pan-blues have not told their followers that if they lose this time they will have another try in four years. They have said that it is now or never; today's vote is the last chance. It is matter of life or death. It certainly was at 1:45 yesterday afternoon.
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
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
RSS