On Monday, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) publicly announced that he intends to run for the chairmanship of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in May. In making the announcement, preceding an official announcement by KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) that he intends to step down, Ma would seem to be mounting a challenge -- and creating a different impression from the mild and modest manner he has cultivated in the past.
In the last day or two, Taiwan's political commentators have begun to discuss the pros and cons of Ma's bid. If the KMT's new chairman is directly elected by the party's roughly one million members -- a break from the ugly tradition of the incumbent chairman appointing his successor -- it will certainly serve as the first step towards democracy within the party. What is funny is that the KMT, which is more than one hundred years old, has started to democratize only after losing power. What a long wait it has been for its members.
Since the KMT lost its hold on power in the 2000 presidential election, its historical burden has become unbearably heavy. The problems the KMT has to resolve include national identity, ill-gotten party assets, party pensions and the merger with the People First Party (PFP). The new chairman of the KMT will have to face up to all these problems. Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), who has not yet announced that he will run for the KMT chairmanship, is considered sophisticated and proficient at behind-the-scenes maneuvering, and therefore more suitable for the KMT chairmanship. If Ma takes over the chairmanship, the KMT's merger with the PFP will fizzle out immediately, for PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) is politically senior to Ma, and will naturally refuse to take orders from him. Therefore, the chances for a merger are slim if Ma is elected.
Those who favor Ma argue that although Wang is better at political strategy, he will not have the guts to tackle the issue of KMT party assets. The public is likely to be more accepting of moves to reform the KMT if they are proposed by the more charismatic Ma. The public now believes that KMT members can no longer ignore the fact that the party assets are monopolized by a powerful few. If Ma becomes the party chairman, he will certainly hope to throw off the historical baggage that prevents the KMT from regaining its hold on power.
If Wang becomes KMT chairman, his impartiality to preside over legislative sessions in his role as speaker will be challenged by the DPP and other parties. This is why Wang supports Lien to continue as KMT chairman.
But Ma has always been careful to protect his image, and has cultivated a reputation of being akin to political Teflon. As a result, he also has very few allies within the KMT who will support him all the way. Some critics have said that Ma's political career has been a smooth ride and that he is like a hothouse flower, who has needed a protective environment in order to thrive. And even in the relatively straightforward environment of the Taipei City Government, recent incidents have greatly damaged Ma's reputation, making it clear that he still lacks sufficient leadership ability. This line of reasoning is Ma's biggest obstacle.
The KMT is the nation's biggest political party in terms of members and wealth. For this reason, the people of Taiwan should be concerned about who will become the party's next chairman. But actually it is immaterial who assumes the post. What is really important is whether the KMT is able to undergo internal reform. Now that Ma has thrown his hat into the ring, he should come forward to outline the measures he will undertake to reform the KMT. The emphasis should be on reform, not on who wins the struggle for power. It is also in line with the high expectations that many people have for Ma.
But can the KMT survive without its ill-gotten assets? This is a question that is well worth asking. It is also a question with which we can measure the sincerity of Ma's intentions to reform the party.
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