If former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Nat Bellocchi is to be believed, the push to oust President Chen Shui-bian (
If this is the case, the charade is not working. If anything, forces in the KMT are now using the maverick campaign to undermine Ma, accusing him of being a pushover. Presumably, these KMT hardliners would prefer Ma lead an armed assault on the Presidential Office with a few thousand stormtroopers in tow, or at least join the sit-in and pout for a few hours like former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
Yesterday's developments offer Ma and his supporters a reminder that all is not well within their party, and that Ma's increasingly vocal enemies in the pan-blue camp are looking for opportunities to undermine his authority -- and eventually prevent him from being the KMT's presidential candidate.
When Ma was elected KMT chairman -- against the expectations of most media commentators and despite fervent opposition from the party's inner circle -- there was a sense among grassroots supporters that the party could be energized and taken in a new direction, if not one entirely free of thuggery and contempt for democratic principles.
This was based on Ma's history of cultivating a reasonably clean persona -- and exercising authority in this manner -- despite being surrounded by the filthiest of the filthy.
The problem is, the forces that would prefer the KMT return to its roots have decided that Ma is not their man, and they are regrouping. If he is to withstand these attacks from within, Ma is going to have to demonstrate that he can stand up for himself in ways other than weakly parroting the language of blue-camp firebrands.
Ma claims that he has "hardened up." Unfortunately, this is not reflected in Ma taking his own line and sticking to it, but in taking a harder line to disarm blue-camp extremists. This is not political strength, nor is it pragmatism; it is flat-footed, wishy-washy and manipulable behavior.
The average blue-camp voter does not endorse public disorder. It would therefore benefit Ma and the nation's morale if he spoke more for the broad majority of people that gave him his chance to be president and less for the rabble rousers within his party and without.
Ma's defense of his role as keeper of the peace in Taipei against the bleatings of KMT city councilors -- who would have anti-Chen protesters break the law and not be accountable -- is proof that Ma has the ability to stare down miscreants in his party. Unfortunately, he so often seems unable to stare down miscreants with any power. That is why he capitulated so readily when People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Reforming the KMT was always going to involve some bloodletting, but now it seems that Ma will have a serious struggle on his hands to achieve this. If Ma cannot control his troops, the DPP will be able to ask: "Who will really have power in a KMT government and can they be trusted?"
The skeletons in the KMT's closet are too many and too odious for the pan-green camp not to be able to exploit this angle, despite its complacency and ham-fisted politicking of late, and despite growing alienation among voters. If things continue in this direction, the DPP will be thrown a lifeline for an election that it should never have been able to win.
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