It was a bizarre day in political circles yesterday. People First Party (PFP) legislators argued among themselves about supporting a proposed statute relating to the investigation and disposal of assets obtained by political parties and affiliated agencies -- a bill targeting assets stolen by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over 50 years of rule.
Later, some Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators also had an argument among themselves over a list of appointments for the Control Yuan proposed by President Chen Shui-bian (
Yesterday's farce on the legislative floor was a reprise of the conflict preceding the legislative elections on Dec. 11. On the one hand, the PFP's internal squabbling was triggered out of political self-interest, resulting in obstruction of the bill. The party has clearly already forgotten its campaign promise -- a mere 10 days since being elected. Before the elections, PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) repeatedly said that the KMT must clarify its position on party assets as a condition for the two parties to merge. Now, both PFP Vice Chairman Chang Chao-hsiung (張昭雄) and caucus whip Liu Wen-hsiung (劉文雄) have called on the KMT "to return what belongs to the nation and the public." Yet these encouraging words have been overwhelmed with pressure exerted by different political interests inside the PFP. As a result, there is no review in sight for this bill.
Meanwhile, the DPP legislators say Chen's nominations for the Control Yuan do not accord with his election promises. They have asked that party discipline not be applied to them if they vote against the appointments, and have threatened to resign in protest if it is.
What is noteworthy is that such dramas, playing out in the legislature on the same day, reveal a distinct political mentality. The courageous DPP legislators who criticized their party and held firm to their political principles should be applauded.
It is encouraging to see matters of right and wrong coming to the fore at this time, because a political party's healthy development depends to a large extent on the trust it is able to inspire in the public. It is common knowledge that resolution of the party assets issue is something that the great majority of people have wanted for some time. There are even a good number of KMT legislators who favor resolution of this matter so that the issue does not hamper the party's chances of regaining power at a later date.
But the excuse offered by the rump of the PFP in blocking the bill -- that the DPP's unwillingness to accept its support is a tactic to cause a rift in the pan-blue camp -- is sheer sophistry. It is precisely this kind of short-sighted thinking that led to the PFP being rejected by the electorate in the elections, in the form of 12 lost seats.
By insisting that appointments to the Control Yuan be subject to scrutiny by the people's representatives in both the ruling and opposition parties, the DPP legislators are standing by their political principles and putting the public interest ahead of their own -- and their party's. The PFP should heed this warning: If it continues to treat matters of public interest with such comprehensive negligence, it will eventually be rejected by the public altogether and go up in smoke.
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