To no one’s surprise, the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) extempore national congress yesterday almost unanimously passed a motion to void the nomination of Legislative Deputy Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) as its presidential candidate, giving yet another example that the party is far from being democratic.
About three months ago, the KMT national congress held at the National Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall unanimously passed Hung’s nomination; at the same venue, the extempore national congress yesterday adopted a motion to void Hung’s nomination, which was followed by a proposal to nominate KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫).
This is the first time in Taiwan’s history — and perhaps one of the few examples in the world, if not the first — that a party has replaced its presidential candidate within a few months of the election.
Certainly, it is the KMT’s “family business” to choose its presidential candidate, but as far as the public is concerned, the “replacement drama” might further prove that the KMT remains clueless about operating in a democracy.
It all began by discussing the proposal to void Hung’s nomination.
Before the voting began, delegate Yu Hao (游顥) proposed a motion that the voting be done anonymously. Although Yu’s motion had been endorsed by more than 100 delegates, past the threshold needed to put it to vote, former KMT vice chairman Lin Feng-cheng (林豐正), who presided over the congress, refused to put it on the agenda, saying that the motion could only be discussed if all the delegates who endorsed it were present. However, he agreed to another motion made by Yao Chiang-lin (姚江臨) to vote on whether to void Hung’s nomination through a show of hands.
If there were certain criteria to meet before a proposal could be put on the agenda, why did Lin not question whether Yao’s motion had met them? And if all the delegates who endorse a proposal must be present, then how did the proposal to void Hung’s nomination pass, since more than 1,100 delegates had signed the endorsement, but only 891 attended the meeting?
When delegates proposed that Chu should be nominated to replace Hung, Lin said that, since choosing a presidential candidate is a serious issue, it should be done “very cautiously.”
Many people might be left speechless upon hearing Lin’s way of doing it “very cautiously” meant that delegates who supported the motion needed to stand up and applaud. And that is how the KMT’s new presidential candidate was chosen.
One of the most frequent criticisms of the KMT government is its opaqueness, which has been the primary reason behind much of the opposition toward it, including the Sunflower movement that eventually led to the party’s defeat in the nine-in-one elections last year.
For Taiwanese who were born after martial law was lifted in 1987, “voting through applauding” is something that they might read about in history books, but for the KMT, it is still a part of the decisionmaking process.
With the vast majority of party delegates supporting the proposal to replace Hung with Chu, it would not be an “accident” if everything were done according to party regulations, if that is what worries the party leaders.
However, apparently, the party leadership is unwilling to even pretend that the KMT is a democratic party.
The nomination is the KMT’s own business, but the party’s undemocratic way of handling it should serve as a warning to voters, a reminder that the party must complete its democratic transformation before voters should put their trust in it.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS