As the recent focus of legislative bickering in Taiwan seems to be centered on money, the pensions of former presidents, salaries of government ministers, houses viewed by the president's family and so on, one would think that there could only be one winner.
After all, the battle is being fought between the world's once richest political party, who fled to an island with nothing -- apart from the contents of the National Palace Museum and probably China's cash reserves -- and enriched themselves at the expense of the local inhabitants over the next 50 years, and a party formed from a fledgling democracy movement made up of a few lawyers who only came into being about 20 years ago. If the Democratic Progressive Party play it right, there should only be one winner in this battle.
But casting one's mind back to last year's US presidential election, a battle on national security was fought between a decorated war hero, who signed up voluntarily to fight in an unpopular war and distinguished himself in battle and a guy who deserted from the home guard (not even the real army), and the coward won.
This just goes to show that in modern politics, with all the spin whizzing around, that you can never trust the people to make the right decision. One can only wait and hope that Taiwan's electorate can see through the blue smokescreen being created for the upcoming elections.
On a side note, in an article (Ma hits the campaign trail for KMT, Oct 23, page 3) you referred to Lien Sheng-wen (連勝文), Lien Chan's son, as a pan-blue heavyweight. I hardly think that his recent election to the Central Standing Committee immediately qualifies him for this title. Could it be he was given this description because he is the son of the recently retired KMT chairman, or the other more likely possibility is that you were referring to his well-publicized battle with his own waistline?
Henry Blackhand
Taipei
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