The way the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) acts, you could be forgiven for believing it created the Republic of China, and the nation would be done for without the party to govern it.
The KMT has never given much thought to preparing for a period in opposition, and neither does it seem to be aware that, in a democracy, the opposition has worth.
The reason the party remains so corrupt is the party itself, for it will stop at nothing to remain in power. This corrupt nature is the seed of its defeat, so the party must fall.
The KMT was actually in opposition from 2000 to 2008.
The KMT was not pleased with the arrangement. It had got used to having its own way running the nation, of dining out at its expense and it could not adapt to the new circumstances. It did not know what to do.
The KMT dealt with being in opposition to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government by blocking bills, slashing budgets and obstructing US weapons procurement.
James Soong (宋楚瑜) tried to stage a comeback by splitting from the KMT and forming his own party, but the People First Party’s support only helped the KMT manipulate the legislature, which hardly helped the latter to learn how to be a good opposition party.
“Things will never improve for Taiwan until the KMT falls,” has become a quite common saying. If there is anything constructive to be taken from the clear ill-intent of the sentiment, it is this: That there is an opportunity here for the KMT to truly learn what it is to be in opposition, rather than knowing solely how to be the governing party, or being content only when wielding power.
If it can only learn to listen, it will find that opposition is really not so terrible.
The KMT might have the opportunity to regroup at the end of President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) term, and realize it should never have ousted former presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) in favor of KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫). And if the party wants to know what the public thinks of eventual unification with China, it just needs to watch how people living in this nation react, and what choices they make.
The KMT seems to be of the opinion that being in opposition is akin to be being in exile. However, this simply is not the case. This is, after all, Taiwan: We are not in China here.
The party has yet to shake off the nightmare of its elimination from China and exile to Taiwan, but in Taiwan, it was able, in the eight years from 2000 to 2008 when it lost the reins of government, to hold on to its party assets and go about its business. It is not for that reason that it has been unable to shake off its fear of defeat.
The KMT should now prepare for a period in opposition, where it can learn to perform the role effectively. The same KMT that was welcomed in 1945 and thrust into exile in 1949 should transform itself into the Taiwanese Nationalist Party — not a party of faux localization advocates who are in it just for short-term benefits — but a party that will work to build a better, normalized nation.
Of course, part of the party’s education in how to be an effective opposition will be returning its ill-gotten party assets. It cannot continue to intimidate the public with its sense of entitlement gleaned from years in power at this point in time where the DPP has the upper hand.
Meanwhile, the DPP should use this opportunity to increase its experience of being the governing party, to make up for the fact that Taiwan has for so long been within the political grip of a single party.
Lee Min-yung is a poet.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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