Having used legal loopholes to buy several converted military housing units, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) vice presidential candidate Jennifer Wang (王如玄) has been using smoke and mirrors to try and shift the focus away from the issue.
In an effort to get out of trouble, she has thrown up a smokescreen by saying that she hopes the focus of election campaigning can return to important national policies and candidates’ opinions about disadvantaged groups, including workers, women and children.
Does Wang take voters for fools? If only candidates’ policies and political views are taken into account, without considering things like their quality of judgement, ability to get things done, resilience, moral character and long-term trustworthiness, how would it be different from an essay-writing competition or a boasting contest?
How can we expose the evil intent behind President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) fine-sounding declaration that “Taiwan’s future will be decided by its 23 million people,” by which he really means that “what Taiwan’s 23 million people decide will be decided by Ma Ying-jeou,” if we do not also consider his “democratic credentials” of having, over the years, opposed direct elections for all legislators, opposed direct presidential elections and opposed the holding of referendums?
If we cannot detect his subconscious desire to prevent independence and move gradually toward unification with China, how can we realize that his “three noes” policy of “no unification, no independence and no use of force” is false, while his true policy is one of “two noes” only — “no independence and no use of force?”
If we do not keep Ma’s hypocritical character in mind, how can we realize that his fine-sounding political proposals, such as the “i-Taiwan 12 Projects,” his “6-3-3” pledge — to achieve annual economic growth of 6 percent, an annual per capita income of US$30,000 and an unemployment rate of less than 3 percent — and his promise of a “golden decade” are all just lies told with all the sincerity of a swindler?
Of course, politicians hope that voters will hear their words and trust them to act accordingly, but voters do not intend to be fooled so easily.
Besides hearing politicians’ words and observing their actions, we should also listen out for what they do not say, such as the fact that Ma did not dare, when meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), to follow the phrase “one China” with the words “with each side having its own interpretation.”
We also need to watch out for what they do not do, such as the fact that Ma does not dare to eliminate his KMT ill-gotten party assets or to display the flag of the Republic of China in the presence of officials of the People’s Republic of China.
Candidates in an election do not have the right to refuse to be examined in the light of day. Are their words borne out by their actions, or do they promise one thing and do another? Do they talk and act very differently in people’s presence and behind their backs? Do they change their whole way of doing things when they take up a new post? With the corrupt ones, the rude ones and those who knowingly bend and break the law, there is no need to denigrate them, because they are tarnished already.
To prevent voters from being fooled by dishonest politicians’ fancy presentation and voting for them out of ignorance, it is not negative campaigning to tear off their masks and expose their past misdemeanors. Rather, it is positive campaigning, because it exposes a gang of fraudsters for who they really are.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Julian Clegg
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with