Two government policies have been halted recently -- the establishment of private arms company Taiwan Goal and the privatization of the Grand Hotel. After these measures became public, they were questioned by the media and criticized by the opposition, which led the government to abandon the plans to avoid difficulties ahead of the presidential elections.
Taiwan's defense purchases have always been handled through official channels. Given Taiwan's unusual international situation, official purchases have always been problematic, which led the government and private parties to set up Taiwan Goal to act as a go-between. This would have allowed Taiwan the flexibility to obtain the necessary weapons and defense technology faster and cheaper. Many other countries use similar systems.
Taiwan Goal was stillborn, and if the idea of privatized arms purchases hasn't been abandoned for good, it has at least been postponed for a long time. This is harmful to Taiwan as a whole and a very high price was paid when minister of national defense Lee Tien-yu (
The Grand Hotel has always been managed by the Duen Mou Foundation (
These are good policies. Even if the current government can't implement them, a future government will. The opportunity will be missed simply because neither side wants the other to score any extra points in the run-up to the presidential election.
For eight years, Taiwan has been treading water, and a slack government and an unreasonable opposition are the main reasons these opportunities are slipping away.
Although the Cabinet believes these policies should be carried out, any positive policy should have been implemented long ago instead of being rushed through when the government's time seems to be running out. These and many other things have been left undone because of the government's wavering, the speed with which political appointees have been replaced, the brevity of their terms and the resulting lack of comprehensive, long-term policy.
The KMT insists that the Cabinet is a caretaker body that should abstain from making any major policy changes. This may make some sense, but why let an opportunity slip by if both the DPP and the KMT agree that these are positive policies? Because the policies involve vested interests -- both the Grand Hotel and arms dealing have long been part of the KMT's sphere of influence and the KMT doesn't want the DPP to stick its nose in there, nor does it want to see the DPP score political points.
The KMT's unwillingness to see any DPP accomplishments and the resulting legislative obstruction is one of the main reasons for Taiwan's slow progress since 2000. The presidential election is an opportunity for Taiwanese to express whether they think the problems were due to a slack government or an unreasonable opposition.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS