In an abrupt announcement, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday night issued a press release that Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Greater Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) will assume the vice chairmanship left vacant by Lin Feng-cheng (林豐正), Chan Chun-po (詹春柏) and John Chiang (蔣孝嚴).
According to the KMT, the appointment is part of the party’s reform efforts, as the new vice chairmen, being heads of local governments, have a better grasp of public opinion and will be able to help the party formulate better policies and become more inclusive.
Some have been quick to praise the move, hailing it as a demonstration that President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who doubles as party chairman, is willing to share power with other major figures in the KMT and begin the task of shifting power to a younger generation. It has also been said that the new appointees will be able to better represent public sentiment to the higher echelons of the KMT.
For the majority of observers, however, the move has been viewed with suspicion, being seen as yet another example of Ma’s selfishness and his readiness to repeatedly flout party regulations.
The KMT’s protestations of a power transition to a younger generation are laughable. Hu, at 66, is two years older than Ma, therefore those claiming that the trio represent an influx of new blood are on shaky ground.
As for the idea that the three will be able to better express the views of the public to the KMT’s higher echelons, a look at CommonWealth magazine’s surveys in the past few years ranking county commissioners and mayors will give an indication as to how effective the new team will be in this area.
These annual surveys generally have the trio ranked among the bottom five. While opinion polls are not elections, they certainly are a reflection of people’s sentiment. The results show the trio are having a hard time understanding public opinion in their own constituencies, let alone having the ability to inform the party of the views of ordinary Taiwanese.
Over the past six weeks, the Ma administration has been besieged by protests against its handling of the cross-strait trade pact and the issue of nuclear power. Members of the public, including some who regard themselves as from the pan-blue camp, have expressed their disappointment in Ma’s leadership and lack of response to public objections, which have exposed his personal inadequacies and his administration’s inability to negotiate or handle a crisis.
In light of these circumstances, the timing of the KMT’s decision to bring the three into the party’s policymaking core looks more like a scheme of Ma’s to drag them down with him rather than share power as has been claimed.
As recently as February this year, Hau was still calling on Ma to step down as KMT chairman if the party were to do badly in the year-end seven-in-one elections.
Now with the inclusion of Hau, Chu and Hu in the center of the KMT’s policymaking unit, Ma can breathe a sigh of relief that at least he will not be the only one singled out to face responsibility and calls for resignation in the event that the KMT eventually does perform badly in the year-end elections.
The appointments again show Ma’s total disregard for party regulations, making personnel announcements while bypassing the KMT national congress.
Some may say the appointment is an internal affair of the KMT and thus not the public’s business. They ought to remember that the internal affairs of the KMT, as the governing party, have a direct impact on the nation’s ability to function effectively as a democracy.
So is Ma truly willing to engage in introspection and hear people’s views, or will he remain — to quote film director Ko I-chen (柯一正) — “like nuclear waste, useless yet dangerous”?
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