The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has always had an uneasy relationship with democracy. It has spoken about it interminably, practiced it little and liked it less. Even after it had reluctantly conceded democratic reform of Taiwan's political institutions, there was no such thing within the party organization itself. Only after two crushing defeats in presidential elections, and the bitter acceptance that it does not have some kind of droit du seigneur on power in Taiwan, has the party itself embraced democratization as a principle of reform. The problem it now faces is that democratization really shows up how far the party has tumbled from its glory days.
The coming election for its chairman is to be the first democratic leadership election the party has ever held. Previous chairman were selected by biddable cabals or simply had their right to the post endorsed by their own flunkies. Even KMT Chairman Lien Chan's (
The problem dogging the party now is just who that rank and file might be. After the election disaster of 2000, Lien organized a re-registration drive to remove from membership lists the millions of members who had joined in the bad old days when it seemed expedient, but had long ago ceased to pay membership dues or take part in party activities. The result was a slimmed down membership of about 1 million.
More than four years later and with another election loss under its belt -- followed, of course, by the "blue terror" of the post-election period -- fewer than 40 percent of those 1 million members have fully paid their membership dues. And of these 400,000 paid-up members, about half are veterans or seniors who either pay no fees at all or pay at a significantly reduced rate.
Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
Wang claims that while party rules approved in 2003 say that a member must have paid his or her dues to have the right to vote in party elections, a specific set of rules for the election of the chairman approved in 2001 do not have this stipulation, nor are they covered by the 2003 rules.
Whichever rules lie behind Wang's casuistry, an argument from simple first principles suggests his view is preposterous. You would not expect a club whose membership dues you had not paid to continue to let you use its facilities. Wang is arguing, in fact, for precisely that right.
Wang's sophistry is entirely self-serving. After all, the rump "paid up" membership is dominated by old Mainlanders who will almost certainly vote for fellow Mainlander Ma. For Wang to have a chance he needs the votes of defaulting Taiwanese.
But on all sides there seems to be an assumption that most of the 600,000 defaulters have either forgotten to pay or are too hard up to pay. The truth that dare not speak its name in this affair is that those 600,000 KMT members might not have paid their dues simply because they no longer want to be party members.
Considering what the party has become under Lien's leadership -- a toady for China -- you can't blame them. But it is interesting to note that in terms of dues-paying membership the DPP is probably now Taiwan's biggest political party.
Minister of Labor Hung Sun-han (洪申翰) on April 9 said that the first group of Indian workers could arrive as early as this year as part of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Taipei Economic and Cultural Center in India and the India Taipei Association. Signed in February 2024, the MOU stipulates that Taipei would decide the number of migrant workers and which industries would employ them, while New Delhi would manage recruitment and training. Employment would be governed by the laws of both countries. Months after its signing, the two sides agreed that 1,000 migrant workers from India would
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
Japan’s imminent easing of arms export rules has sparked strong interest from Warsaw to Manila, Reuters reporting found, as US President Donald Trump wavers on security commitments to allies, and the wars in Iran and Ukraine strain US weapons supplies. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s ruling party approved the changes this week as she tries to invigorate the pacifist country’s military industrial base. Her government would formally adopt the new rules as soon as this month, three Japanese government officials told Reuters. Despite largely isolating itself from global arms markets since World War II, Japan spends enough on its own
On March 31, the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs released declassified diplomatic records from 1995 that drew wide domestic media attention. One revelation stood out: North Korea had once raised the possibility of diplomatic relations with Taiwan. In a meeting with visiting Chinese officials in May 1995, as then-Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) prepared for a visit to South Korea, North Korean officials objected to Beijing’s growing ties with Seoul and raised Taiwan directly. According to the newly released records, North Korean officials asked why Pyongyang should refrain from developing relations with Taiwan while China and South Korea were expanding high-level