Kaohsiung County Commissioner Yang Chiu-hsing (楊秋興) announced on Aug. 9 that he would contest the November mayoral elections for Greater Kaohsiung, ending weeks of speculation that he would cut ties to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and enter the race as an independent. Yang made the decision despite having signed an agreement with Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) before the party primaries, in which they both promised to accept the result of the primary and stump for the winner.
To explain his change of heart, the 54-year-old, two-term commissioner alluded to Robert Frost’s poem The Road Not Taken, saying that he had decided to “take the road most people take,” which is to say the “middle road.”
While declining to say exactly what he meant by this, Yang went on to express discontent with the way the party primary was organized — which he only decided was unfair after losing. Evidently aware that this made him look like a bad loser, Yang said the choice was not really his because he could no longer bear to see Kaohsiung languish as Taiwan’s No. 2 city. Yang said that in 20 years it could become another Singapore, a future apparently only he can realize.
None of this is very convincing. Yang does look like a poor loser, seeking revenge against a party he feels slighted him. Or perhaps he overestimates his popularity, an error not uncommon among politicians used to success.
Some speculate that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) had encouraged Yang, leading him to believe that they would embrace him if their own candidate proved unable to deliver. The KMT denies this, of course, although they seem all too pleased with the prospect of a split DPP vote.
Sadly, there is nothing more to Yang’s desertion than the countless others like it, when politicians allow egoism and personal ambition to cloud their judgment. The “little giant of the south” would have fared far better if, instead of running around apologizing for his DPP past, he followed the example of Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), who in 1994 accepted the party’s choice in the Taipei mayoral primary and supported his opponent, Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), who with Hsieh’s help won the general election and made history.
This is not to say changing your mind — or party — is necessarily a bad thing. As Yang said, he has a democratic right to run as he sees fit, but it is risky, as longtime US Senator Arlen Specter, a Republican, found out after switching parties last year, only to be defeated in the Democratic primary in May. If Yang was having doubts, he should have made a move before pledging to back Chen Chu if he lost. Both Yang and Specter seem to have forgotten the fragility of public trust.
More important than what will become of Yang, however, is how his candidacy will affect DPP prospects in November, which were never robust, despite its traditional strength in the area. Political parties, like democracies themselves, inevitably struggle between the aims of the collective and those of individual members. With sovereignty long central to its identity, the DPP has more than its share of difficulty maintaining unity: independence parties attract independent-minded people.
However, there are upsides to Yang’s announcement. One is that by happening this month, it will be old news by November. Another is the possibility that Yang will attract as many votes from the KMT as from his former party. Finally, a betrayal like this may well spark the kind of solidarity needed to pull the DPP together, from old party ideologues to rising prima donnas.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers