History is coming full circle ("KMT delegation travels to China for historic visit," March 28, page 2). The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) can go home now. As far as the Taiwanese are concerned, China is the KMT's home, not Taiwan.
Some Taiwanese did favor going back to the "motherland" after World War II. However, they did not expect the murdering, corrupt, thieving, arrogant, self-appointed government that was the KMT regime. "The KMT does not support Taiwan independence" is a statement that masks the fact that the KMT does not support democracy. In fact, it does not support Taiwan.
Are KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and his KMT cronies so naive as to think they can talk the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) out of "non-peaceful means" to resolve the Taiwan issue? If that's the case, more power to them. More likely, they would rather disarm Taiwan to make it more convenient for the CCP to annex Taiwan by "non-peaceful means."
The KMT can return to China as a twice-defeated warrior. It was defeated once in China, and again in Taiwan; once by force, and then by peaceful means. The sad thing is, it has never learned the reason for its defeat. It is totally out of step with time, and totally out of step with the people, both in China and Taiwan. Lien and his cronies can take their party and their martyrs back to China where they came from. Or whatever land or heaven they wish. But the Taiwanese will not be with them if they want to go "back" to the same murdering, corrupt, arrogant, self-appointed Chinese ruler that is the CCP. Because Taiwan is free, and China is not.
Chen Ming-chung
Chicago, Illinois
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission