Some of the foreign academics who visited Taiwan to observe the presidential and legislative elections believe the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) far-reaching intervention in and attempts to manipulate the elections backfired, helping the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) maintain a legislative majority and President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) win re-election with an unprecedented 8.17 million votes.
They also believe that the CCP might have “lost” Taiwan forever.
However, the CCP cannot lose something it never had, so talk about losing Taiwan has nothing to do with reality — it is a non-issue.
It cannot be denied that Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) promotion of a “one country, two systems” solution for Taiwan and Beijing’s use of representatives in Taiwan to try to win the presidency and bring about peaceful unification has caused a backlash.
Taiwanese — including young second and third-generation mainlander voters who identify with Taiwan — feel the threat of the CCP’s tyranny, and they must do all they can to oppose it and protect Taiwan.
Beijing’s unreasonable response to the Hong Kong protests shows no respect for international treaties such as the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, and it supports the Hong Kong police’s use of violence against protesters.
This has caused strong resentment among Taiwanese — especially the younger generation, which focuses on democracy, freedom and human rights — against the CCP regime.
Neither the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) nor the party’s presidential candidate showed any support or even concern for the Hong Kong protests.
This is very different from Tsai and her administration, so the young generations never hesitated to vote for her.
Former KMT chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) and Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), its presidential candidate, were the main causes of the party’s defeat.
In an attempt to court Xi, Wu changed his stance and expressed support for a cross-strait peace agreement.
During the KMT’s presidential primary process, Wu changed the rules on several occasions to eliminate his political foes and help promote Beijing’s representative.
He also included retired lieutenant general Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷), former Mainland Affairs Council deputy minister Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) and former KMT legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) — all openly pro-Chinese — on its legislator-at-large list to reduce dissenting opinion, which resulted in strong protests from inside and outside the party.
Although Chiu and Chang were replaced, retired Central Police University associate professor Yeh Yu-lan (葉毓蘭), who supports the Hong Kong police’s violent attacks on the pro-democracy camp, was placed second on the list and Wu remained in fourth place.
These decisions had quite an effect on voter support for KMT legislators.
In the eyes of the majority of voters, Han is a bona fide country bumpkin, whose statements, actions, capability and style are incompatible with the requirements of a president.
The KMT’s internal so-called “blue elite” and “blue intelligentsia” felt ashamed over the decision to give Han the presidential nomination, which hurt the party’s dignity and sense of tradition.
Han has been seen as a tool of Beijing in its attempts to gain control over Taiwan, which intensified the feeling of imminent crisis and made large numbers of young voters spontaneously turn out to vote.
Although the KMT lost the presidential election, it remains in power in New Taipei City, Taichung, Kaohsiung and another 12 cities and counties, and observers are closely watching to see whether it will make a comeback.
What the public wants should always be on politicians’ minds. Policies promoted by a government that does not value public opinion and only listens to Beijing will not fulfill the public’s wishes, so it is only natural that they will be overturned.
Whoever leads the KMT into the 2024 presidential election — perhaps former New Taipei City mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫), KMT Legislator Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) or KMT Legislator Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) — must set things right and innovate.
The KMT’s most urgent task would be to reshape the party into one that expresses its love and devotion to Taiwan — a loyal opposition. It should also consider changing its name to the Taiwanese Nationalist Party, a Taiwan-centered party, and treat Taiwan as its own subject.
Taiwan’s swing voters, the US, Japan and other democracies all want Taiwan to develop into a mature democracy with mature party politics. They hope that the KMT will be transformed into a party that focuses on Taiwan and engages in fair competition with the DPP, the Taiwan People’s Party and the New Power Party, and stops being Beijing’s vehicle for dividing the nation and destroying its democracy.
Parris Chang is professor emeritus of political science at Pennsylvania State University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing