Lessons from the elections
President-elect Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) impressed voters with her sincerity. She apparently learned from her failures in previous local and presidential elections, and worked hard to overcome new challenges.
In contrast, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) and People First Party candidate James Soong (宋楚瑜) failed to impress voters, even though they addressed the public in Taiwanese and repeatedly mentioned Taiwan during their campaigns.
The editorial “A historic day for politics in Taiwan” (Jan. 17, page 8) provides valuable lessons for political parties and politicians.
Chu and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) have criticized Tsai over her “intention” to import pork products containing ractopamine from the US. Refusing to be Tsai’s envoy to China, Soong said that her cross-strait policy could not be implemented “even by God.”
Several cases of buying votes in exchange for cash, banquets and/or sightseeing tours conducted by the KMT were reported and investigated, with the illegal actions proving to be ineffective this time.
The KMT tried to fool Taiwanese by saying that surrendering the nation’s dignity and sovereignty through the so-called “1992 consensus,” based on the “one China” principle, was a “stabilizing card.” It does not require a doctoral degree in politics to play such a card for peace.
A 16-year-old Taiwanese girl performer was called “a Taiwan independence element” when she carried a Republic of China (ROC) flag in a show. In Chu’s rallies, which were attended by civil servants, many supporters waved ROC flags and held placards reading “One Taiwan.”
Chu and Wang said that KMT members have been divided and called for unity within the party. The KMT leadership should drop the word “Chinese” from the party’s name to eliminate a misunderstanding that the KMT hopes to participate in Chinese politics someday.
Charles Hong
Columbus, Ohio
The ‘1992 consensus’ myth
The KMT has said that the so-called “1992 consensus” is a significant achievement that has made peace and dialogue possible between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.
However, many academics doubt the existence of the “1992 consensus.”
There is no documented evidence of the “1992 consensus” supposedly reached in a meeting between Koo Chen-fu (辜振甫), Taiwan’s former top negotiator with China, and his Chinese counterpart, Wang Daohan (汪道涵).
It was eight years after their meeting that a KMT member first mentioned the “1992 consensus.”
Four former officials and diplomats from the US said they were concerned that if Tsai refused to accept the “1992 consensus,” grave consequences might ensue.
What is the “1992 consensus”?
A consensus is an agreement reached without any objection from either side. Both the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) agree that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to “one China.”
The CCP says that China means the People’s Republic of China, while the KMT says it means the ROC. The CCP unequivocally says that the phrase “each side having its own interpretation of what ‘China’ means” is unacceptable.
Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said that the “1992 consensus” was a “consensus without consensus.”
Concerns over Tsai’s stance are baseless. She said that the 1992 meeting is a historic fact that she does not deny, but that more work needs to be done before a complete agreement or consensus can be reached.
With such discrepancy between the two sides, academics would agree that what Ko said is right. Anyone who says that the “1992 consensus” exists either cannot think clearly or is dishonest.
It is only a trick that the KMT uses to deceive people — particularly voters — in Taiwan and communists in China for their political gain.
Zhuang Chern-siong
Changhua City
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.