While Taipei mayoral hopefuls independent Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Sean Lien (連勝文) have voiced consent on holding a debate, it seems that Lien is somehow insincere about his willingness to engage in a debate and reluctant to face voters directly, making it questionable that he would be a good, responsive mayor if elected.
Since earlier this month, Ko has been challenging Lien to a debate on their respective policy platforms, and while Lien quickly agreed to it, his campaign executive director Alex Tsai (蔡正元) has stipulated many conditions for the debate, which seems to be a de facto rejection of Ko’s invitation.
When Ko first asked his KMT rival to debate policy with him, Tsai said the debate should focus on women’s issues and that the host of the debate had to be a woman, since, at the time, Ko was at the center of some controversies for remarks he made that were criticized as sexist.
It is true that gender issues are important, but it does not make sense at all that Lien would accept Ko’s challenge to debate policy ideas, then stipulate that “by the way, the debate topic should be about women,” not to mention that whether the host is a man or a woman is totally irrelevant.
So, although Lien said “yes” to Ko’s proposal, the prospect has since faded in light of the conditions that Lien’s camp put forth.
Nevertheless, Ko continued to repeatedly propose the idea, and a second opportunity arose when representatives from the two camps met to negotiate details of the debate. However, the negotiation did not go smoothly, because Lien’s camp insisted that the debate involve multiple cross-examinations and rebuttals between the candidates, but rejected the idea of taking questions from civic groups or voters, while Ko’s camp said it believed that responding to questions from voters would be essential.
Although the dispute may seem irrelevant, it is significantly symbolic.
A mayor is elected — at least theoretically — because voters believe that the person can solve their problems and improve the lives of the city’s residents.
Hence, it is very important for a candidate to face voters directly, take their questions, respond to them and show voters what solutions there are to the problems troubling them, as well as presenting a vision for the city’s future.
A mayoral candidate’s ideas and policy proposals for a city can be well demonstrated while answering questions from civic groups or voters. When a question-and-answer session takes place during a debate, voters get the opportunity to hear clear responses to their queries from all competing candidates and make comparisons, which is very helpful when casting a ballot at a polling station.
Although it is equally important for the two candidates to challenge and question each other in a debate, this happens almost every day. Whenever Ko makes a comment, whether it is a policy proposal or criticism of Lien, the media take the comment to Lien and ask for his response. Such “crossfire” has been going on since the day both candidates decided to run in the election, and therefore it is not as important for them to have multiple exchanges during the debate as it is for them to answer questions from the public.
If Lien is reluctant to take questions from voters now, when he is in the midst of soliciting their support, it is hard to imagine that he will be willing to listen to and respond to Taipei residents if he is elected.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS