As Taiwan continues to digest the political ramifications of a landmark second-term majority government for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), it is important to note that the next four years will be shaped in no small part by the reaction of two parties on either side of the Taiwan Strait: the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
With the CCP, an immediate answer is unlikely, as the attention of its leader, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), will likely be consumed for many months dealing with the 2019 novel coronavirus.
Of more immediate interest is how the KMT is going to respond to its crushing defeats in Jan. 11’s elections. Its response will have a significant impact on Taiwanese politics and will shape Xi’s Taiwan policy.
The KMT essentially has two options:
It could adopt a continuity strategy, selecting a fresh-faced leader and enacting a superficial re-branding exercise in an attempt to persuade people that it has changed, but without changing any of its core policies.
This would be a high-risk strategy, based in no small part upon blind faith — hoping that the DPP will mess things up in the next four years and presenting the KMT with an opportunity to regain power.
A bolder and wiser approach would be to acknowledge the need for serious reform and do whatever it takes to bring the party in line with the needs and aspirations of an electorate that is more patriotic and outward-looking than in the past, and the majority of whom identify as Taiwanese, not Chinese.
Given the KMT’s historical, cultural and psychological attachment to China, this would be difficult, but not impossible.
On Tuesday, former New Taipei City mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) appeared to rule himself out as a candidate in the KMT’s chairperson by-election, writing on Facebook: “The party’s transformation will include me, but the election does not need to include me.”
A popular figure within the party, Chu had been widely tipped as a front-runner to succeed former KMT chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義). It might be that Chu has decided it is time for the party to pass the baton to the next generation to bring in fresh ideas and reform. If so, this is a good sign.
KMT Legislator Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) on Facebook yesterday warned that the party must avoid vacuous sloganeering and undergo real reform.
Whoever the next KMT leader is, if they are serious about reform, they will need to do much more than simply move the party away from its dogged adherence to the so-called “1992 consensus” — an explicit acceptance that Taiwan is part of China.
A good start would be for the party to finally grant the Ill-gotten Party Assets Settlement Committee unrestricted access to its archives. This would go a long way toward healing old wounds and help demonstrate that it is genuine about reform and repentant for its actions during the dark days of the Martial Law era.
Another welcome move would be for its new leader to ban closed-door meetings with Chinese officials, which undermine Taiwan’s democracy and make the party appear untrustworthy.
Above all, the KMT must unequivocally jettison its policy of unification with the People’s Republic of China.
The KMT is at a crossroads: If it accepts the need for wholesale reform, it might survive and provide a much-needed political consensus on which Taiwan can fortify its democracy.
However, if it cleaves to outdated shibboleths, it will end up in the dustbin of history.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US