The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) national congress, during which Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) was officially enthroned as the party’s presidential candidate, was a farce. It wanted to give the impression of unity, but was completely lacking in any incentive or desire for unity. Its star, Hung herself, even shied away from any actual substance regarding how she actually intends to fight the coming campaign. She talked at length in platitudes and sound bites without really saying anything.
The “Little Red Pepper” proved very flexible, stowing for a second the idea of “one China, same interpretation” and focusing on the so-called “1992 consensus.” This was no accident, as any evocation of the “same interpretation” would only get in the way of her “sacred duty” and “grand mission.” What exactly is her “sacred duty” and her “grand mission”? She chose not to go into that. The national congress had agreed to accept her as the party’s presidential candidate, but, in her acceptance speech, there was no mention of the position of “president of the Republic of China (ROC).”
Had Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson and presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) failed to say that she was running for ROC president, the pro-unification media would have been all over her, baying for blood. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is quite content to be seen as the head of an area, while Hung has felt uncomfortable talking about the very existence of the ROC. You cannot help but feel that this is because she cannot bring herself to speak of the existence of the position of ROC president.
She did, on several occasions, mention the term “ROC,” and uttered the word “president” once. However, on no occasion did she string the two terms together. All she managed was “after I am elected president.” The first time she spoke of the ROC, it was in a historical context, talking about how the KMT old guard had traveled to Nanjing to commemorate the founding of the ROC by Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙).
For Hung, there is a difference between Taiwan and the ROC: They are on two different levels. She wants to “sincerely love Taiwan, and protect the ROC with [her] life.” Her sincerity goes as far as to step back from acknowledging the existence of the ROC, and her saying that the ROC would only win if she is elected president is a betrayal of her own true conviction.
The Little Red Pepper’s stated sacred mission has nothing to do with freedom, democracy or justice; it only knows the language of pro-China, pro-unification sentiment, dismissing Taiwan’s democracy as “populism,” and absolving Ma and his administration of any responsibility.
Democracy enables citizens to oust incompetent governments with the power invested in them through the ballot box. Ma has proved himself to be completely incompetent at the nation’s helm, and yet he still feels able to say that he owes Taiwanese no apology. Hung tried to place the blame for the Ma administration’s incompetence at the feet of the DPP, and the KMT thinks that Taiwanese owe it something. It is time for the KMT to relinquish power.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS