The poll released yesterday, and cited by Taipei City Councilor and legislative candidate Lin Chin-chang (
But the more interesting thing about the poll was what it might tell us about the topic of localization. In terms of which party "loves Taiwan," the DPP beat the KMT by a 2:1 ratio. Just as interesting, a very large number of respondents said they believed the reason the DPP was able to obtain power so soon after its creation was because of its Taiwan-centered consciousness.
Lin has taken the results of the poll to mean that people reject the idea of "one China," and he advises the KMT to drop its commitment to this ideal or else face catastrophe at the polls. But "one China" is a symptom of the KMT's malaise, not its cause. The real locus of the KMT's problems is in the leadership's refusal to face facts.
The election result in March should have been a wake-up call. In 2000 Lien Chan (
The last thing the KMT needs, if it is to become centrist and mainstream again, is a merger with the PFP. Yet this is exactly what Lien has been working on.
You might think that the election results since 1996 show the popularity of the "Lee Teng-hui line" and the likely success at the polls of whoever can assume the mantle of heir to the pragmatic pro-Taiwan centrism that was Lee's hallmark. Yet James Soong said that he would not merge with the KMT as long as it still retained what he called "the stink of Lee Teng-hui." We can only interpret this as ideology blinding common sense.
If the KMT wants to see power again, it has to become what Lee tried to make it (and let us note here that the centrist Lee, who kept stealing the DPP's popular policies in the 90s, was something different from the fulminating anti-China zealot he has latterly become).
Younger KMT members surely realize this. Lin is not the first among the younger generation in the party to talk of a radical makeover. Ever since the pan-blue ticket's election defeat, there has been talk in the party of adopting a more vigorous pro-Taiwan stance, dropping the "commitment" to unification and even changing the name to the Taiwan Nationalist Party.
But such voices are simply not heard, and the party is moving in exactly the opposite direction.
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