In the second televised presidential election debate, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) expressed regret that his party had not reformed during its eight years in opposition. After the presidential election, I wrote an op-ed in this newspaper arguing that reform of the KMT remained an urgent issue. Today, more than five months later, the KMT still remains unreformed, but party reform has become even more urgent.
The KMT center, and not the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), has become the most important opposition to the Ma government. For example, on July 10, the China Times, one of Taiwan’s most “blue” journals, attacked Ma’s leadership in a damning editorial. Four days later, the Kuomintang News Network, a KMT English-language Web site, circulated a full English translation around the world.
Such KMT attacks on Ma and his government have become commonplace and the most severe strikes come from KMT legislators elected on the party list such as Chiu Yi (邱毅) and Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱). One example of KMT legislators refusing to listen to Ma was their refusal to pass all of his nominees for the Control Yuan despite the KMT’s overwhelming majority in the legislature.
In principle, I agree with Ma’s desire to “separate the party from the government” (黨政分離). But this policy has not worked. With such old, conservative men as KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung, former chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) in charge, the KMT irresponsibly nominated unsuitable people for the legislative elections.
Again, take Chiu as an example. After the 2004 presidential election, Chiu got on a truck and rammed it into the Kaohsiung District Court, a crime that was video-recorded, televised and for which he served a jail term.
Why did the KMT nominate a convicted criminal high on the party list where his election was a certainty? KMT officials said Chiu was rewarded for sacrificing himself for the party. In fact, Chiu and the other critics are beholden to the old conservative men, not to the KMT.
Rather than let the old conservative men run the KMT, Ma should have played a more active role in the nominations. If he had, there would be much less opposition now as many of those now attacking Ma would have failed in their bids to become legislators.
In nominating his Control Yuan list, Ma should have personally met with KMT legislative leaders, noted that his list was carefully constructed to represent different sectors and demanded that the legislature pass all (or none) of his nominees.
Ma’s failure to discuss the issue personally meant that the legislature picked off several somewhat green nominees. He failed in his effort to be a president of all the people, as well as losing face, because he could not control an overwhelmingly KMT legislature.
There is only one solution. To move out the old conservative men, Ma must become the new KMT chairman. In an effort to reform, he can bring in some younger people who believe in reform to help implement it, such as Taoyuan County Commissioner Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Chiayi Mayor Huang Min-hui (黃敏惠) in such roles as secretary-general or vice-chairman.
This must happen very soon as the new team needs to be able to ensure that the nominees for county commissioner and mayor next year are truly interested in reform.
As the opinion polls show, Ma’s presidency is in serious trouble. He has fallen from a high of more than 58 percent of the votes to less than half of the people expressing satisfaction with his government. Some aspects of this decline relate to his foreign and China policies, which seem to differ from his campaign speeches. But, the Diaoyutai (釣魚台) turmoil, for example, would have been much easier to manage had wild KMT legislators not helped create an atmosphere of increasing tension.
Clearly, gaining control of the KMT is much more than a domestic matter. And it is vital to the maintenance of Taiwan’s democratic health. President Ma, please act soon!
Bruce Jacobs is professor of Asian languages and studies and director of the Taiwan Research Unit at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS