“With a change of seat comes a change of mind” (換了位置就換了腦袋) is a popular way of describing a politician whose stance vacillates according to what position he or she holds.
A recent example can be found in news suggesting President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) inclination to double as the chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Ma, who less than a year ago pledged that he would be a “president of the people” and refrain from also serving as KMT chairman, said in an interview with CTI-TV aired on Sunday that it would be easier for him to push policies through and boost government performance if he were to take over as party chairman.
Presidential Office Spokesman Wang Yu-chi (王郁琦) was quick to downplay Ma’s remarks, saying that he was merely making an “objective analysis.” Ma, however, continues to act coy as far as this issue is concerned; he has not responded to speculation that he could run in the election for chairman this July.
A final decision on the matter will be made in June at the earliest, Ma said on Tuesday after a meeting with KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) that has fueled more speculation.
Recall how former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was criticized by KMT politicians for doubling up as Democratic Progressive Party chairman.
The KMT at the time said that Chen was power-hungry and failed to rise above partisanship to be a “president of the people.”
In 2006, the KMT caucus drafted the “four sunshine bills,” proposing a lobbying act, a political party act and amendments to the Political Donation Act (政治獻金法) and the Public Functionary Assets Disclosure Act (公職人員財產申報法).
Under the leadership of then-KMT chairman Ma, the KMT caucus inserted an article into the political party bill that prohibited “the president from doubling as head of a political party.”
Three years later, Ma’s refusal to give a clear answer on the issue indicates that he is no longer against the idea.
“With a change of seat comes a change of mind,” as they say.
With the KMT holding executive power and three-quarters of the legislature, Taiwan is now witnessing the concentration of power in smaller circles.
With several incidents in past months pointing to corrosion of the nation’s democracy, its institutions and its freedoms, if Taiwan were to combine one-party governance with a consolidation of power at the head of that party, the consequences could be far-reaching.
Ma is fond of using the phrase “Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely” in his speeches as a warning to others.
But Ma clearly thinks that he is no ordinary person, and that he would be able to overcome the temptations that come with something approaching absolute power. One thing that he will not be able to overcome, however, is opposition from within his party, which has already made itself keenly felt.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS