Where does the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) sense of entitlement — its belief that it should hold power throughout the nation, at all levels of government — come from? Is it from its glowing record?
Looking at the popularity of its representatives at city and county government levels, it becomes evident that their administrations are consistently rated near the bottom. The KMT mayoral candidates for Taipei and Keelung are harping on about change and transformation, as if their own party had not been responsible for the situation in those cities.
Where does it come from?
The most fundamental — and preposterous — reason is that the KMT believes that the Republic of China (ROC) is its own. What happened to the opening couplet of the ROC national anthem, in which it establishes the aim of the party to be the “Three Principles of the People?”
Even now, the KMT claims the ROC belongs to it, to govern as it sees fit. The party believes that the ROC would founder with any other party at the helm. It is always seeking to indoctrinate its members to see others — and other parties — as the enemy, and it refuses to accept that the history of China has moved on, or that the party itself has been changed by history.
Now the KMT mayoral candidates for Taipei and Greater Taichung are in trouble, the party is coming out with the dubious logic that the ROC itself is in danger if a non-KMT candidate is elected. In Taipei, when independent mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said that he is standing for Taipei mayor in the ROC, his KMT rival Sean Lien (連勝文) retorted that Ko does not believe in the ROC and asked him exactly what he meant when he referred to the ROC.
It was hardly surprising that somebody answered him: “I would like to see you talk about the ROC when you are standing in front of [Chinese President] Xi Jinping (習近平).”
There was no response.
The ROC was overthrown by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in China in 1949 when the former was under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), but continued to survive in Taiwan after it was grafted into the nation by the KMT.
Since then, the KMT — this foreign-power-in-exile — has thrust its legacy on people from other parties who were pushing for the introduction of democracy. Every time an election comes around, they shout until they are red in the face in defense of the ROC.
Twenty years ago, New Party cofounder Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), then-Taipei mayor Huang Ta-chou (黃大洲) — representing the KMT — and the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) tussled for the position of Taipei mayor in a hard-fought campaign. Chen emerged victorious, and yet the ROC in Taiwan failed to crumble. It was the KMT who, when it lost its hold on the central government in 2000, went begging to Beijing, until its big beasts fell like flies at the feet of the communists.
In the recent APEC summit in Beijing, special envoy former vice president Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) cut a lonely figure, even more so than Hong Kong Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying (梁振英), as it was not even clear exactly what he was representing.
What does the rallying cry: “Do your own bit to save your own nation” (自己的國家自己救) mean to him? The meaning seems quite apparent to me. It is time for the KMT to step aside and be replaced by those who have hopes and dreams for the nation and who are willing to work to save it.
The work can begin with small steps. First, the local elections. Then the legislature. On to the presidential election. Taiwan has a hope only if it can effect structural change in how it is governed.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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