The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is staging a splendid imperial-style spectacle. KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Similar charades from imperial times can be read in history textbooks. After a power struggle, the victor would say that "the support of so many people left him no choice but to take the throne." It was a hackneyed ploy even back then, but Lien has never been one to avoid a cliche.
It's time to say enough is enough and put an end to this soap opera, this comedy of horrors. By putting on such an outmoded spectacle, the KMT has once again demonstrated that it is out of touch with reality and with the democratic era.
Of course, pan-green camp supporters should be delighted, for if Lien stays as chairman, he will certainly try to be the KMT's presidential contender in the 2008 election. That would basically guarantee a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) victory, regardless of who its candidate is. The reason for this is simple: By staying on as chairman, Lien will block the democratization of the KMT and the transfer of power to the next generation. All the pan-green camp needs to do is stand by and watch the KMT fall apart.
Pan-blue supporters shouldn't pin their hopes on Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (
However, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
This response clearly shows how far the KMT has to go in learning the ways of democracy. A choice of candidates is standard in democratic elections, but as soon as Ma challenged Lien, he was accused of splitting the party. With that kind of mentality, no wonder the KMT has long behaved as though national elections risk splitting the nation.
While many pan-greens and others would applaud the idea of Lien, as captain, going down with his ship as the KMT sheds employees and hemorrhages money, such a drawn-out death scene would be hard to stomach. Does Taiwan really need another four years of Lien's spoiled-brat sulks and "one true king" pretensions? For the sake of the nation's democracy, Lien should step down to allow for the restructuring and democratization of the KMT and for multi-party politics to flourish.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS