A major advantage of democracy is that it can solve political issues through peaceful means. The principle of democracy is that power shall never be forever dominated by one person or a small clique of people.
Power is transferred through elections. Nevertheless, holding elections does not necessarily mean democracy actually exists. Without elections, however, there is no democracy. This is why the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) first chairmanship election last week was not fully democratic.
When the KMT, a century-old revolutionary party, for the first time allowed its rank and file to directly elect its chairman, it was indeed a major step toward democracy, although there is still much for the party to accomplish. Holding elections, however, is only a beginning. The question is whether the KMT can continue its drive to reform itself.
I believe such reform may be difficult because democratic processes are incompatible with the KMT's party structure. It is the pressure of Taiwan's overall democratization that has forced the KMT to adopt a more democratic system. Small wonder that the election turned out to be a baptism by fire, leaving a number of obstacles that are making it difficult to move forward. There are still no signs of a power transfer.
As a result of pressure from Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) has to step down following continuous electoral defeats. Now his protege, Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), has also been handed a resounding defeat.
I wonder if Ma's hold on power within the party will be weakened now that Lien has been appointed honorary chairman of the KMT by the party's Central Standing Committee.
I believe that the coming internal struggle will become even more intense than the chairmanship election campaign. The question of whether or not Wang would attend the first meeting of the Central Standing Committee following the election, and whether he would take up his post as acting chairman at that meeting drew media attention.
According to a media report, Wang had previously insisted that he would not participate in the meeting until outgoing KMT Secretary-General Lin Fong-cheng (林豐正) convinced him to do so. However, Wang left halfway through the meeting, after the passage of the proposal to make Lien honorary party chairman, which shows that his purpose wasn't to participate in the meeting, but only to pass the "Lien clause."
In all honesty, the proposal to ask Lien to remain as honorary chairman, if not directed by Lien, was probably organized by Lien's clique within the party. The reason why Lin managed to persuade Wang to participate was for him to help see to it that the "Lien clause" took effect. Why else would he leave to inform Lien that he had been appointed honorary chairman as soon as the proposal was passed?
The question is why it was Wang, who some say will resign from his post as deputy chairman, and not Ma, who informed Lien? According to media reports, the reason Wang left the meeting was because he was planning to meet with legislators supportive of him and seek the support of the newly-elected party representatives in order to gain a majority in the Central Standing Committee election, scheduled for next month.
With Lien having been made honorary chairman and the attempt to win the support of a majority of Central Standing Committee members, one can but wonder what Lien and the KMT's democratic ideals really are.
The KMT's internal struggles have entered the second phase and who will come out ahead remains unknown.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator based in Taipei.
Translated by Daniel Cheng
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with