During a recent debate organized by SET TV between the two main candidates in the Taipei mayoral election, Sean Lien (連勝文) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and independent Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), nitpicking political commentators supporting Lien criticized Ko for arriving dressed in a shirt and a jacket, saying that he lacked respect for the people of Taipei.
Both Lien, who was dressed in a suit and tie, and Ko remained true to their backgrounds, so there was little to criticize.
If people want to nitpick, it should be over the six civic groups that were chosen to pose questions. Should they not have been neutral and asked candidates about their positions on public policies rather than focusing on their political orientation? The questions posed to Ko by the representatives of the three groups recommended by Lien and his campaign team were slanderous, yet when addressing Lien, their tune changed completely. This blatant lack of neutrality, fairness and impartiality tarnishes the image of civic groups concerned with public welfare.
However, the words and actions of the groups are a reflection of the character of the candidate who they were recommended by. As certain groups did nothing to hide their intentions, it was clear to all which candidate is supported by people who are impartial, open and aboveboard, who transcend the blue-green divide and are concerned with what is right and wrong, and which candidate is supported by people who are intolerant and interested only in intensifying the blue-green polarization.
At a time when the nation is a long way from establishing sunshine laws, to enhance transparency in government, Ko has released information about his personal income and been transparent about his campaign funds. He has also pledged that if he wins, he would not join any political party and demand that all top officials pull out of all party activities. Why can Lien not follow Ko’s lead and place all his information on the table for everyone to see?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor and a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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