President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is looking more and more like a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) version of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). During the 2008 presidential campaign, Ma constantly criticized Chen for his feeble governing and for blaming every problem on 50 years of corrupt KMT rule. Now, when the Ma administration is critical of issues like the environmental assessment of the Central Taiwan Science Park and the dilapidated state of Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, it resorts to blaming the Chen administration. How does this make Ma any different from Chen?
The development of the third stage of the Central Taiwan Science Park was approved by the DPP government, and at the time, the DPP was indeed guilty of making some mistakes. However, the protests against the science park development are not a recent phenomenon, they have been going on for some time. Local residents have repeatedly told the government and the media about how they have been treated unfairly and how the government has pushed for development without the legally required environmental impact assessment. They have made their point clear with protests at the park’s Taichung branch, the park administration, the Environmental Protection Administration, the gate of the National Science Council and through the courts.
After two years of hard work by the residents, the media are finally taking notice, the courts have accepted their complaints and the government must now take their protests seriously. With the problem out in the open, the Ma administration chalks the issue up to a decision by the previous government. Is this really an acceptable excuse?
The Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport was one of former dictator Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) 10 infrastructure projects. It is 31 years old, dilapidated and ill-managed. Foreign visitors are fed up with it, and Taiwanese are embarrassed by it. Ma says the DPP shoudl have taken better care of it. Is this really an acceptable excuse?
Renovating the airport would take about a year. If the KMT felt that the main gateway to Taiwan was an important issue, it could have begun renovations as soon as it regained power. If it had, renovations would have been completed by now. Problems like the poor and overpriced restaurants, broken baggage carts and clogged toilets are all a matter of management. To blame the previous government for these problems is a bit far-fetched.
The KMT has been in power for more than two years. Any national problems, regardless of how old, are now its responsibility. Many of the initiatives the DPP undertook while in office lacked public support, and they were voted out of office as a result. With the KMT back in power, the DPP has paid the price of its mistakes, and it should no longer be responsible for the nation’s problems.
While Ma may have strengthened the fighting spirit of dark-blue supporters with his criticism of the DPP, a larger number of voters feel he has abandoned the presidential high ground. By fanning the political divide and sowing ethnic discord, the presidency has been lowered to the level of crass party politics.
It has become difficult to tell Ma apart from Chen. Ma is enamored of electioneering and politically motivated stunts. He will eventually become hostage to dark-blue interests and lose public support.
Can Ma differentiate himself from Chen? Well, he could always stop shifting responsibility and start admitting that his government could do better. He could also push for an immediate resolution of environmental and developmental issues and restore the airport to international standards. However, the answer to the question boils down this: Does Ma have the competence and conviction to change?
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS