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.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath