Chiang Kai-shek (
So what possible justification could there be for a democratic state to "honor" his memory by keeping statues of him on military bases?
Since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost power in 2000, there have been many instances in which pan-blue diehards have demonstrated their desire to brush aside the legal requirements of a democratic state in an effort to re-establish totalitarian control of Taiwan.
This attitude was especially evident after the 2004 presidential election. At the time, rumors abounded that a coup d'etat had been attempted by pan-blue fanatics, but had quickly fizzled out because of the good sense of most military and political leaders.
Later came such travesties as the attacks on government buildings by mobs led by pan-blue legislators, demands for unconstitutional "compromises," and the establishment of the extra-legal "March 19 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee" designed to prove whatever former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
However, in a democracy trust is something that political leaders must work to establish. They are not entitled to it. So when members of the KMT respond to criticism of their party's inglorious, authoritarian past with the kind of visceral rhetoric they employed this week, many Taiwanese become deeply afraid of what will happen should the KMT return to power.
We've had to suffer through Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou's (
Perhaps Ma would be better off investing some time in establishing his national leadership credentials by demonstrating that he is unafraid to stare down the revisionist reactionaries in his own party, before he gallivants about the globe giving civics lessons to the Chinese Communist Party.
He could start by endorsing the de-politicization of the one institution that can make or break Taiwan's democratization: the military. It is absurd to maintain that "for historical reasons" it is desirable for the military to retain the trappings and symbolism of a one-party state. It is vital to show that the institutions of the state belong to the state's ultimate sovereigns -- not any political party, but the people of Taiwan.
Removing the statues of the "Generalissimo" from all public localities is desirable and necessary to dismantle the totalitarian cult of personality that befits only crackpot regimes like North Korea.
Jonathan Fenby wrote in his biography of Chiang, Chiang Kai-shek: China's Generalissimo and the Nation He Lost, "The Cold War made an objective assessment of Chiang almost impossible as the past was viewed through the lens of what followed."
"Either he was a faithful friend of the West who had been undone by Communist cunning, Western irresolution and treachery in the State Department; or he was a reactionary, cruel, incompetent dictator who was no better than the warlords, who betrayed the true interests of his nation by failing to stand up to the Japanese in time, and who perverted the sacred teachings of Sun Yat-sen (
Taiwan is no longer bound by the intolerant fetterings of the fight against the "Communist bandits," which was used to justify much evil during Chiang's day. It is time to look with clear eyes at Taiwan's past, as well as that of the KMT.
Chiang is no democratic icon. Take the statues down.
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