Hardship may be difficult to withstand, but anguish is even worse. There is still hope at the end of hardship as long as you grit your teeth and struggle on. However, anguish is hardship without hope.
For the past six years, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has caused Taiwan anguish, but he still feels good about himself and saves NT$480,000 per month despite a monthly income of NT$470,000. He is clearly a lame duck president, but he is still clenching his fists, trying to fight back.
However, Ma’s counterattack is not aimed at the “evil communist bandits,” nor is it aimed at greedy and corrupt officials or businesspeople: these groups are the comrades of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
At the party’s Central Standing Committee meeting on Wednesday last week, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced that the party would not appeal the court’s decision to reinstate Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng’s (王金平) party membership, causing party members to rejoice over the end of a long fight between Ma and Wang.
However, Ma went on the counterattack and criticized Chu, calling the decision unprincipled, adding that it did nothing to differentiate right from wrong, and he then canceled a scheduled joint appearance with Chu to set off sky lanterns.
It appears that the public now has a new fight to look forward to, between Ma and Chu. The KMT infighting is dragging on and on, and people are getting tired of it. Ma has no respect for procedural justice, but he talks about differentiating right from wrong — how could KMT members not feel anguish with such an overweening president?
Experience shows that when Ma talks about right and wrong, he means that what counts is what he says is right or wrong. He is right, incorruptible and follows the rule of law, and everyone else is wrong, corrupt and influence peddlers. How about some facts? If Ma really is perfect and always right, why does his approval rating hover at about 9 percent and why was his party so resoundingly beaten in the nine-in-one elections last year? Those facts make it clear that Ma is far from qualified to determine what is right and wrong.
The Special Investigation Division engaged in illegal wiretapping of the Legislative Yuan’s switchboard, and Ma and former premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) leaked classified information related to prosecutors’ investigations in an alleged case of influence-peddling involving Wang; while still chairman of the KMT, Ma instructed the party’s disciplinary committee to expel Wang and Central Election Commission Chairman Chang Po-ya (張博雅) promptly played along, instructing the legislature to annul Wang’s qualifications as a legislator. These examples, all of which are a big “no” in any democracy under the rule of law, show that Ma’s belief of what is right cannot be trusted.
Even bigger questions of right and wrong surround lost sovereignty, economic deterioration, stagnant wages, and the fading generational and accommodation justice caused by the government’s pro-Chinese policies.
However, Ma insists that there is nothing wrong with his overall policy direction. He has tried to brainwash Taiwanese with his pro-China policies for the past six years, but despite that, identification with Taiwan continues to rise. Some would say that this settles the question of who is right and wrong.
Ma’s highfalutin talk about lacking principles in the handling of the fracas over Wang’s party membership and his inability to accept that former Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) was not charged with leaking confidential information while former Cabinet secretary-general Lin Yi-shih (林益世), former Taipei City councilor Lai Su-ju (賴素如) and many other KMT members were involved in irregularities, makes one wonder how Ma goes about differentiating right from wrong. Lai even continued to run for office with the unspoken consent of the KMT, but luckily voters can tell right from wrong and did not return her to office.
Ma lacks self-awareness, so he is unable to see that he is being laughed at and making a mess of matters of national importance.
Most KMT members have seen through him, which makes people think that the party might not have given up completely on differentiating between right and wrong. This is the KMT’s only hope: If it could leave Ma’s mistakes behind and embrace mainstream public opinion and listen to what the public feel is right, the party’s future would appear a little brighter.
If the party could correct the mistakes of the pro-Chinese overall policy direction, the party-state system, the ill-gotten party assets, the practical influence over military personnel, the police, civil servants, public school teachers and the judiciary, perhaps it would no longer have to worry about winning votes.
The key issue at stake here is whether Chu’s talk about reform is for real or for show. KMT supporters must understand that after five presidential elections, at a time when awareness that sovereignty rests with the people is surging and when oversight, checks and balances is what counts, they must stop believing in the myth about the party’s greatness.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is now in a good position to return to power, owing largely to Ma’s disorganized rule. However, the DPP has always suffered from leadership problems when it comes to undertaking reform, which raises the question of how it will deal with the current situation.
As the number of civic campaigns has grown over the past two years, the DPP seems to have lost its ability to lead the debate. It has been hesitant and has refrained from taking a stance on the issue of national identity, and when it comes to economic issue and living standards, it has failed to make any concrete suggestions. If the party cannot deal with the leadership issue and continues blowing hot air about gaining a legislative majority, it will surely be shamed by the new political image and style represented by Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
The KMT might have done its best to discredit the DPP, but when it comes to key issues the party has lacked the decisiveness and ability to take command that is required of a ruling party. This is something to which the party must give some serious thought as it continues to needle Ma and criticize Chu.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath