After former deputy legislative speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) won the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) chairperson by-election with a record-low number of votes on Saturday last week, speculation arose that the party might see a new wave of defections, particularly by pro-localization members.
This speculation might become a reality following Hung’s swearing-in as the KMT’s first female chairperson on Wednesday and would cast a long shadow over the party that has fallen from grace.
Nicknamed the “Little Red Pepper (小辣椒),” Hung stands out with her outspokenness and peppery personality, as well as her radical pro-unification ideas. In May last year, during her campaign for the KMT presidential primary, she proposed a “one China, same interpretation” formula, which defines cross-strait relations as “two constitutional governments in a whole China.”
Given a lack of competition, the KMT’s party congress approved Hung’s nomination as the party’s presidential candidate in July last year. Everything seemed to be going well until a wave of defections by party members who were opposed to Hung’s cross-strait policy prompted the KMT leadership to replace Hung with New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫).
Although Chu failed to become the savior whom the KMT desperately needed, his defeat in the Jan. 16 presidential election, along with the party’s failure to maintain a legislative majority, gave rise to calls for party reform and a re-evaluation of its oft-criticized China policy.
The calls sparked hope that the KMT might eventually abandon the delusion that Beijing supports the idea of “one China, with each side having its own interpretation” and follow a more Taiwan-centric political path.
However, the hope was dashed after Hung was elected KMT chairwoman, which is largely the result of the continuing dominant role of the pro-China Huang Fu-hsing military veterans’ branch within the party.
Hung taking the party’s reins bodes ill for the KMT’s future. Her China policy would not only put the party on a fast track to self-destruction, but also steer it even farther from mainstream public opinion.
According to a survey released on Tuesday by the pro-unification New Party, a KMT splinter group, about 63 percent of respondents defined cross-strait ties as “state-to-state” relations. Only 18.3 percent said that both sides of the Taiwan Strait were “split since the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949 and have yet to be reunited.”
In addition, 40.3 percent said they disagree with Beijing’s and President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) assertion that the so-called “1992 consensus” is indispensable to maintaining the “status quo.”
Another survey released on March 14 by Taiwan Indicators Survey Research showed a growing awareness of Taiwanese identity. A majority of respondents reject the idea of “one China,” whether it refers to the People’s Republic of China (81.6 percent) or the Republic of China (60 percent).
The Chinese-language United Daily News also published a poll on the same day showing a record-high 73 percent who identified themselves as Taiwanese, while those who identified themselves as Chinese hit a record low of 11 percent.
While Hung’s term as chairperson is set to expire in July next year, she could still do enough damage during this 17-month period, which is particularly crucial for a party that is engaging in soul-searching and seeking to make a comeback in the 2018 local elections.
It remains to be seen in which direction Hung plans to steer the party. However, a KMT that leans further toward China and continues to turn a blind eye to the nation’s growing Taiwanese identity is doomed to be rejected by voters.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s