So Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
It is hardly surprising, then, that he should be so flabbergasted that such an arrangement should twice fail to confirm his career trajectory into occupancy of the Presidential Office.
After a year of claiming the shooting of President Chen Shui-bian (
Unfortunately, when Lien belittles Taiwan's achievements in front of an audience in the manifest tyranny of China, it is something else that he has in mind: Taiwan is not "democratic" because it does not recognize Lien's droit du seigneur over the presidency.
Certainly, Taiwan's democracy is flawed. But ironically, these are in ways that benefit Lien. The KMT has retained its stolen assets and the pan-blue camp has retained the media dominance it acquired under martial law. The reason for this is that the democratization process was negotiated. Unlike countries that threw out long-serving dictatorships by a more robust process -- a revolution, for example, which would wipe the slate clean of the old hegemony and start anew -- Taiwan's current political settlement, if it can be called that, is the result of the KMT surrendering dictatorial power while being allowed to retain much of the political and social structures that underwrote it. How else could the pan-blue camp try to engineer a military coup to overturn the result of the presidential election last year?
Taiwan might even be too democratic. After all, amid the pan-blue-instigated instability after last year's presidential election, pressure was put on Chen to declare a state of emergency. There are some of us who think he should have seized this opportunity to bring about the revolutionary shake-up Taiwan has never had. Chen could have declared a state of emergency with pan-blue support, then used the powers it gave him to throw the pan-blue leadership and their legislators in jail, after which he could use the green rump of the legislature to legalize proceedings with an enabling act.
Such behavior is common in Latin America, where it is known as an auto golpe, or "self coup." That Chen resisted the temptation burnishes his democratic credentials, though a democratic step backward could have been the precursor to two steps forward. But now, because of Chen's restraint, the pan-blue camp is able to continue its work as an agent of China's expansionism, selling out Taiwan's freedoms for permanent demotion to an undemocratic "Taiwan Special Administrative Region."
Lien's latest betrayal can only have us wondering how long it will be before Taiwanese decide his antics must be stopped. English King Henry II once asked of Archbishop Thomas Becket, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" We ask: Will no one rid Taiwan of this treacherous Lien Chan?
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS