After serving as chairman of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) for some two years, Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) has decided not to run for re-election. His case is a textbook example of many of Taiwan’s politically dispossessed.
One is almost tempted to feel sorry for Wu as he steps down — or is pushed off the stage — by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). I say almost, but that is as far as it goes.
Wu is one of those strange Hakka who, like many Aborigines and Hoklo, have a rightful place as masters in their own land but have given it up for the security of being second-class citizens in the KMT.
Why? What drives such people to prefer to settle for guaranteed crumbs and lower status that are provided by the KMT machine?
Wu has held semi-influential KMT positions. He got to be mayor of Taipei, and while the recent presidents of Taiwan have all been mayors of Taipei at some point, that was never on the cards for Wu.
Wu has never been one to risk all in seeking greatness like People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜). He has never risked; he has only accepted.
Thus Wu became party chairman, but solely with the backing of Ma.
With that stopgap purpose served, Ma is now telling Wu to step aside because he wants to be not only president of Taiwan but also in control of the party.
Wu has been the typical party man: loyal, unquestioning and subservient to the hierarchical totem pole.
Such party men bend to those above them; they accept the fact that they will always receive bestowed, not earned, positions. They are the unfortunate suffering servants.
This is said not with any reference to the prophet Isaiah. Rather, these men are simply servants in what should be a democratic society, and they certainly suffer. So do they deserve our sympathy? Or do they simply get what they deserve?
Wu was born in Taiwan in the Japanese colonial period. He should understand what it means to live under a colonial regime and therefore should realize that with the KMT, he has helped to substitute one colonial master for another.
Wu’s family suffered under the KMT during the White Terror period, but instead of learning that this is the price of democracy, Wu has only learned to bow and serve his new masters.
Hakka claim a fighting spirit and their history often bears this out, but their history also bears out that many have sacrificed fighting for principles in favor of fighting for bestowed favors.
They will do this even if it means maintaining second-class citizenship.
Former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) is one of a few Taiwanese Hakka who played the system in an alien regime and kept his principles. Biding his time, he rose to the top.
In the 1990s, no one did more in a concrete way to develop Taiwan’s democracy than he.
But Lee eventually suffered KMT retaliation for this. Because he fostered democracy, he had to bear the brunt of the blame of the KMT losing its one-party state.
He ended up as an unwelcome Hakka guest in the KMT ranks.
In contrast, Wu is exiting the stage in Prufrockian fashion. He has been an “attendant lord” and started a scene or two.
He has been “an easy tool,” deferential and glad to be of use.
Even if he is awarded the hollow title of honorary KMT chairman, should we shed tears for him or acknowledge the simple, inevitable slap in his face?
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath