Yesterday’s nine-in-one local elections were a vote of confidence on the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government. They ended with a resounding rejection, as the KMT suffered a landslide defeat. Among the special municipalities, it lost Taipei, Taoyuan and Greater Taichung, in addition to Greater Kaohsiung and Greater Tainan, which were already under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) control. It also lost Keelung, Changhua and Penghu counties. This was a clear signal that voters are unhappy with the government and, with a slap in the face of President and KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), they have ushered in the post-Ma era.
Most notably, independent Taipei mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) led Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei mayoral candidate Sean Lien (連勝文) from beginning to end. Without a party apparatus to back him up and with no political experience, Ko had access to only limited resources, while Lien was backed by the KMT’s vast financial resources, tactical voting organization and solid support in the city, where even former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), despite a very strong record as Taipei mayor, failed to win re-election. However, Ko transcended the blue-green divide, successfully appealed to both blue and green voters and mobilized young voters with the help of social media, putting constant pressure on Lien and splitting the KMT voter base.
There are great differences between Ko and Lien in terms of their backgrounds as well as experience, and Lien was never able to rid himself of his image as the son of a wealthy and powerful top government official. Lien’s campaign director, Alex Tsai (蔡正元), relied on a traditional campaign as he called on deep-blue voters to return to the fold, and people campaigning for Lien did not refrain from playing the racist card, calling Ko a Japanese imperial subject, a bastard and a descendant of Japanese imperial officials. Lien’s campaign organization also used government resources to investigate Ko’s handling of National Taiwan University Hospital’s MG149 account and claimed that he had been involved in organ harvesting. However, none of this seemed to hurt Ko and instead only increased support for his policy positions.
Greater Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強) may be an able administrator, but after two terms as Taichung mayor without being brought into the central government and without nurturing a successor, his only option was to run for re-election. Faced with the challenge launched by DPP candidate Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍), who has spent 10 years building support in the city, Hu rushed out the Bus Rapid Transit system and the soft opening of the National Taichung Theater to play up his political achievements, but despite the full support of the KMT, Lin emerged the winner.
Taoyuan County Commissioner John Wu (吳志揚) was expected to do well thanks to the county’s imminent elevation to special municipality and the Taoyuan Aerotropolis project, but he proved unable to rise to the challenge of the DPP’s Cheng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦). Even shining star New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫), who had been predicted to coast to an easy victory, instead engaged in a hard-fought battle with DPP candidate Yu Shyi-kun (游錫堃). In the end, Chu won, but lost a lot of his luster in the process.
Local elections do not involve the central government, and focus on the local candidates’ policies and tactics. However, the Ma administration’s performance determined the political environment and helped the pan-green camp to greatly increase the number of votes and areas under its control.
Ma must now take full responsibility, and democratic principles demanded that Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) take political responsibility by stepping down. As party chairman, Ma must of course take responsibility for the results and step down as party chairman. Even if he refuses to step down, saying that these were local elections, he will be a “lame duck” president lacking the authority to control the party, the government and the military.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS