Commenting on the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) disruption of legislative proceedings during a review of the budget for the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program, KMT chairman-elect Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said: “How can the chairman of a party issue orders by remote control to an unfamiliar legislature?”
When the KMT had a majority of seats in the legislature, it did not seek to settle scores with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) or bully legislators, Wu said.
Although opposition lawmakers have a duty to supervise and check the power of the executive, their actions should not cause the legislative process to descend into chaos, he added.
Not only is the KMT in opposition, having lost its majority in the legislature, but the dust is still settling after a fiercely contested battle for party leadership. The KMT, whose lineage can be traced back to the founder of modern China, Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙), is now in complete disarray.
Despite holding a meager 34 legislative seats, KMT legislators’ “passionate” performances on the legislative floor have gained the party international notoriety, with a video of a brawl over infrastructure spending published online by the BBC.
However, despite the government’s plummeting approval ratings, the KMT’s loud and antagonistic tactics have failed to turn its fortunes around.
Following an internal power struggle, former KMT chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) is preparing to make way for Wu.
However, Beijing appears to harbor misgivings about Wu and still supports Hung. It remains to be seen whether the interaction and friendly relations between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which have been maintained since 2005, would continue. The opportunities and threats posed by the KMT’s continued close relationship with the CCP, and the seemingly bleak electoral outlook for the KMT are interesting new political developments.
For the sake of healthy democratic competition, all Taiwanese should hope that the KMT transforms itself into a conventional participant of the domestic political scene so that it can serve the public by providing a robust opposition to the DPP — unless the KMT is swept aside by a new political force.
Fortunately for the KMT and the nation, Hung’s policy of “rapid unification” with China has not become mainstream within her party.
Nevertheless, Wu has a difficult task ahead of him due to the actions of former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who set the KMT on a course that, although not as radical as Hung’s, was severely out of touch with mainstream public opinion. The Sunflower movement in 2014 and the bloody nose inflicted by the voters in last year’s elections say it all.
Wu’s decision to imitate Ma’s “one China, each side with its own interpretation” framework might initially seem like a sensible course of action. However, the average age of voters who approve of the “one China” policy is rising, while the idea of “natural independence” awareness is gaining traction among the younger generation.
Meanwhile, Beijing has distilled its definition of “one China” into a demand to recognize the so-called “1992 consensus.”
It no longer permits the “Ma formula,” a move that has left the KMT high and dry, unsure of which way to go.
The KMT is left with only one viable course of action: to realign itself in accordance with mainstream public opinion. It must dispense with Hung’s “one China, same interpretation” and Ma’s “one China, each side with its own interpretation” formulas, otherwise it will be unable to garner sufficient votes to return to power, let alone combining that with a majority in the legislature.
The longer the KMT languishes in opposition, the less useful it becomes in the eyes of Chinese leaders. The party can no longer simultaneously please its domestic audience and Beijing with the semantic sophistry of the “Ma formula,” as Taiwanese politicians and Beijing refuse to endorse it.
As such, continuing to cling on to the outdated political formula would be nothing short of electoral suicide.
Furthermore, since US President Donald Trump took office, the political situation in the Asia-Pacific region has changed rapidly. Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the US now form the backbone of a new democratic alliance designed to contain an expansionist China.
However, despite the new situation, the KMT still persists in viewing Taiwan through the prism of “one China,” which is the primary reason it is still a long way from regaining office.
Wu is an intelligent man who might be able to change the course of the party.
For the first time in its history, the KMT has lost both the presidency and legislative majority, and is a fully fledged opposition party. During former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) two terms in office, the DPP ruled as a minority government, with the KMT holding a majority in the legislature. As such, KMT lawmakers were able to curtail Chen’s powers — even his plan to purchase new military equipment was blocked by the KMT.
The KMT’s latest violent protests in the legislature have failed to rouse the public or elicit a significant reaction from the party’s support base. During the DPP’s years as a minority party in the legislature, its protests were sometimes excessive, but it often had the support of the public, as it followed public opinion. The opposite is true with the KMT, which is used to being the ruling party.
The public is not interested in the style of opposition offered by the KMT; engaging in political games and rushing to heap criticism on every government policy initiative. The public is calling for a mature opposition party — the KMT should draw upon its considerable experience in government to provide constructive criticism of the DPP’s policies.
For example, the public is dissatisfied with the way the Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) administration has handled the introduction of the five-day workweek, pension reform and the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program. The KMT should have provided clear-headed and incisive criticism of these policies; instead it raised the stakes by tabling two alternative bills, flouted majority public opinion by jumping on the anti-pension reform bandwagon, and threw water balloons and flour during a presentation of the infrastructure program by Premier Lin Chuan (林全).
While in government, the KMT promised that it would reduce its party assets to zero, yet once in opposition it has been doing all it can to cling on to these assets. By resisting the government’s transitional justice efforts, the KMT has allowed itself to fall into the same trap as Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國). If the party behaves this way, it cannot expect the public to remember and give it credit for any of the positive things it did while in government.
The KMT’s fall from grace after eight years in government was not only a result of the party deviating from public opinion, but also due to its capitulation on cross-strait policy. No one knows how long it will take the KMT to recover, but one thing is certain: When Wu takes over leadership of the party in one month’s time, the most urgent task will be to change the way it perceives itself.
The KMT must transform its ruling-party mindset to that of a responsible opposition party that recognizes the fundamental importance of public opinion, which has the power to support or sink a government.
If the KMT assumes the role of a shadow government that cares about the welfare of Taiwanese, engages in constructive political debate and holds the government to account, then it might have a chance at returning to power. If it fails to reform itself, the KMT would be finished.
Translated by Edward Jones
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s