Election time has come around again and, as everyone knows, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is in its element when it comes to organizing support, with the local party headquarters and grassroots support working together to mobilize core votes.
The thing is, the KMT is not a reformist party: Not only does it have little time for democracy and human rights, its members also suffer from a serious lack of ideals or passion for principles and doctrine. So how does the the organization mobilize its members?
It proffers them things they cannot refuse. The system by which it does this is to offer huge incentives, sometimes in the form of the promise of exorbitant profits that the majority of participants can get a piece of. More importantly, this inducement system operates through weaving dreams of prodigious wealth, appealing to the majority of local residents and profit-seekers, infecting them with a mania and getting them to hand over their votes.
Land rezoning and speculative development are part and parcel of this inducement system. Farmland is relatively cheap, so it is possible, through urban planning, zone expropriation and urban land consolidation, to rezone farmland for residential or business use, which can triple its market value. The allure of such easy pickings gets people scrambling for their piece of the action.
In the run-up to elections, politicians, local vote captains and brokers go into action. The way people vote becomes a deciding factor in whether or not land is rezoned and developed. Election campaigns are a trading floor and voting becomes just like bidding for contracts.
Seasoned politicians “prettify” these development plans in how they introduce them. Thus we have proposals such as the Taoyuan Aerotropolis, the Hsinchu Taiwan Knowledge Economy Flagship Park, originally known as the Puyu Development Plan, and the 12 “i-Taiwan” construction projects. The central government covers its back by dressing these plans up as “major national construction projects,” but the main objective behind them is to use them as a way to block objections and to build its case for expropriating land, speculate on property prices and win elections.
When up against fierce opposition from farmers or local residents, candidates and the speculators they are in cahoots with just try to bully the less powerful, saying the needs of the majority outweigh those of the few, for the greater good.
Human rights issues are rarely solved by an appeal to the numbers of beneficiaries. If the protection of human rights does not quite fit in with the land expropriations, it does not matter how many people agree with the proposals, the politicians still have no right to proceed with the expulsions.
The KMT, so that it may win the election, uses government policy and the system, with things such as low taxes and interest rates, to complement land speculation, thereby raking in the benefit, both in money or by attracting votes.
This is because the people opposed to land-use rezoning and expropriation are farmers, who only want to protect their farmland and to continue farming it, in line with the law, despite the low returns, while the ones who are demanding the land be rezoned and wrested from the farmers want to speculate on property prices, in violation of the law.
The people who are using the land legally are having their rights stolen from them and are being displaced, while those who want to use the land in ways that are illegal are — far from being fined for breaking the law — handsomely rewarded. Does the nation stand a chance?
Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the land economics department at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with