Over the past eight years, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) frequently accused the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of “opposing the government only for the sake of opposing” and now the comment best describes the KMT itself, especially its members’ criticism of the use of the term “Chinese Taipei” at the World Health Assembly (WHA).
Addressing a WHA meeting at the Palais des Nations in Geneva on Wednesday, Minister of Health and Welfare Lin Tzou-yien (林奏延) used the term “Chinese Taipei” when referring to Taiwan, but did not use “Taiwan” at all.
It was no surprise that immediately after the speech, DPP Legislator Tsai Shih-ying (蔡適應) and New Power Party Legislator Freddy Lim (林昶佐) — who were in the observers’ seats during the speech — expressed their “regret” and “disappointment” respectively.
However, some people’s jaws might have dropped hearing the strong reaction from the KMT.
In addition to criticisms from individual KMT lawmakers and politicians, the KMT legislative caucus on Friday attempted — unsuccessfully — to propose a motion to condemn Lin over his “downgrading” of Taiwan’s status as a sovereign state by failing to mention “Taiwan” in his speech and to demand the minister apologize for it.
Anyone with a knowledge of Taiwan’s political scene knows that the KMT has been a firm defender of the term “Chinese Taipei.”
Although KMT politicians claim that they would prefer to use “the Republic of China,” they consider “Chinese Taipei” acceptable, as it is in accordance with the so-called “1992 consensus” allegedly reached by representatives from the Straits Exchange Foundation and China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits in 1992 that both sides of the Strait are parts of “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
KMT politicians have often been upset with and lashed out at some DPP or other pro-independence politicians for opposing the use of “Chinese Taipei,” saying that it was a move to break the cross-strait consensus that might bring serious consequences if China was upset.
According to this logic, should the KMT not be the first to praise a minister from the DPP administration who uses the term “Chinese Taipei” and defend him against Tsai’s “regret” and Lim’s “disappointment?”
The ridiculous development shows that the KMT is not a party that sticks to its ideas and principles — it is a party that “opposes only for the sake of opposing” and is willing to try anything to make its rival look bad, rather than thinking of the nation’s future.
This mentality can also be seen in the party’s attitude regarding proposed amendments to the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) and the Referendum Act (公民投票法). In the past, the KMT opposed relaxing such laws, but ahead of the transition of power, it suddenly moved to accept amendments proposed by the DPP to relax the regulations on demonstrations, as well as lowering the threshold for holding referendum.
In a statement explaining the shift, KMT Central Policy Committee executive director Alex Tsai (蔡正元) said that since the DPP would be taking over the government, the KMT no longer needed to “look after the DPP.”
So, this is how the KMT thinks. It supports or opposes a policy or a proposed amendment not because it is good or bad for the nation, but because it is good or bad for the KMT — or its rivals.
As for the “Chinese Taipei” issue, at least pan-green politicians spoke up against something that a DPP official said when it was not in line with their long-time beliefs, while the KMT spoke against it only because a DPP official said it.
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.