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.
President William Lai (賴清德) attended a dinner held by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) when representatives from the group visited Taiwan in October. In a speech at the event, Lai highlighted similarities in the geopolitical challenges faced by Israel and Taiwan, saying that the two countries “stand on the front line against authoritarianism.” Lai noted how Taiwan had “immediately condemned” the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas and had provided humanitarian aid. Lai was heavily criticized from some quarters for standing with AIPAC and Israel. On Nov. 4, the Taipei Times published an opinion article (“Speak out on the
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
News about expanding security cooperation between Israel and Taiwan, including the visits of Deputy Minister of National Defense Po Horng-huei (柏鴻輝) in September and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois Wu (吳志中) this month, as well as growing ties in areas such as missile defense and cybersecurity, should not be viewed as isolated events. The emphasis on missile defense, including Taiwan’s newly introduced T-Dome project, is simply the most visible sign of a deeper trend that has been taking shape quietly over the past two to three years. Taipei is seeking to expand security and defense cooperation with Israel, something officials
“Can you tell me where the time and motivation will come from to get students to improve their English proficiency in four years of university?” The teacher’s question — not accusatory, just slightly exasperated — was directed at the panelists at the end of a recent conference on English language learning at Taiwanese universities. Perhaps thankfully for the professors on stage, her question was too big for the five minutes remaining. However, it hung over the venue like an ominous cloud on an otherwise sunny-skies day of research into English as a medium of instruction and the government’s Bilingual Nation 2030
RSS