For the sake of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-People First Party (PFP) alliance, some people within the camp should come up with the guts to tell KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) that their latest demand -- that a new election be held -- will likely work against them.
The pan-blue's offbeat performance after the election has not only provoked the resentment of the 50 percent of voters who voted for President Chen Shui-bian (
During this past week, two surveys conducted by pro-pan-blue Chinese-language newspapers released on Monday and yesterday indicated that the majority of the general public disagrees with the massive protest going on in front the Presidential Office. The poll released on Monday cited a figure of 65 percent, and yesterday's poll 59 percent.
Also, by Wednesday, virtually all major news media, including those that are pro-blue, began to urge the alliance leaders to accept the proposal offered by Chen to amend the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Law (
The pan-blues have nothing to blame for this but their own ridiculous handling of their defeat. While their sense of disappointment and anger from losing on such a narrow margin -- 0.228 percent -- is understandable, their handling of the situation is not. Leaving aside the issue of the inherent danger in inciting tens of thousands of highly-volatile supporters to take to the streets in protest, the way that the pan-blues have repeatedly escalated and shifted their demands not only tries the patience of everyone, but reveals a very fundamental problem within the camp -- the absence of crisis-management and decision-making abilities.
On the evening of his election defeat, Lien stated that he wanted to file a "a lawsuit overturning the election result." That, of course, was entirely within his right, and very likely he will eventually be entitled to a judicial recount of the votes. However, once all the ballot boxes were sealed by the courts 12 hours after his speech, the pan-blues changed their mind and began to ask for an immediate administrative recount, because such a lawsuit could take months.
That was an impossible demand, since the law does not provide for administrative recounts. But when Chen agreed to amend the Presidential and Vice Presidential Election and Recall Law to have an administrative recount by next Tuesday, the pan-blues then refused the offer and also refused to review a bill that they themselves had submitted to the Legislative Yuan for that purpose earlier. Instead, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
Then on Wednesday, sensing that a recount would be unlikely to overturn the election result, Lien and his supporters began to talk about holding a new election which is only possible if a verdict is entered, finding the past election to be illegal. This means that Lien and Soong will have to go back to square one -- filing lawsuits and seeking judicial relief.
So, can somebody from the pan-blue camp please explain to the rest of us what was the purpose of all the charades over this past week?
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