Of the policies proposed by the four presidential candidates so far, James Soong's (宋楚瑜) China policy is perhaps the one Beijing likes the best. In Soong's talk on "Taiwan's big future," he announced his China policy in detail, but yet with care and reservation. Later on, he also mentioned his policy on some occasions, both inside and outside the country. In his interview with the Washington Post, he gave more specific details, which reveal a clearer picture of Soong's pro-Beijing China policy.
Following reports appearing in the Japanese media that Soong is China's favorite, the Washington Post once again reported that "many of China's reformers hope that Soong will win the presidential election." Of course, what they mean by "China's reformers" has yet to be determined, but the foreign media in Beijing understand that there is evidence indicating that Beijing prefers Soong over the other candidates and that Soong's China policy fits well with Beijing's policy.
Soong believes that Taiwan's greatest challenge will lie in the economic realm. Therefore, in order to become an Asia Pacific Regional Operations Center, Taiwan must jettison the semi-ban on big ticket investments that constitutes the "no haste, be patient" policy (戒急用忍) and open the "three links" (三通).
Actually, "security" is Taiwan's greatest challenge, with China being the one and only threat. Economically, although Taiwan has not yet opened direct links, it has already been regarded as one of the world's more formidable trade partners; if domestic control allows greater flexibility, the establishment of the Asia Pacific Operation Center will also help ease domestic restrictions. At present, China stills remains at a high risk, highly unstable point in its development of finance and trade; the losses and failures of the Singapore government's Suzhou investments provide a grim warning to "China market" optimists.
Direct links would encourage further investment in China, which could create serious problems with capital outflow from Taiwan and a rise in the unemployment rate. Politically speaking, China does not recognize the existence of Taiwan, yet economically it constantly urges Taiwan to abandon the concept of "no haste, be patient" and liberalize direct links. Of course there is no mystery as to why they do this. But from Taiwan's point of view, its leader has to consider what course of action would best benefit the whole country.
Soong's plan to put pragmatic diplomacy on the back burner, his unwillingness to struggle against China diplomatically, is in fact the same as the "Hong Kong-ization" of Taiwan. This amounts to the acceptance of China's "one country, two systems." Where there is sovereignty, there is diplomacy; likewise where there is diplomacy, there must be sovereignty as well. The basic difference between Taiwan and Hong Kong is that Taiwan has sovereignty, and does not require Beijing's instructions before making major decisions. Soong's unwillingness to struggle against China diplomatically is tantamount to giving up the sovereignty of the Republic of China and embracing "one country, two systems."
This is not a matter that can be cleared up simply by Soong's announcement that he rejects the formula of "one country, two systems." Before we have reached an agreement on mutual recognition -- like that between North and South Korea -- abandoning diplomatic effort is just the same as giving up our sovereignty. China shuts out Taiwan's diplomatic activities; therefore, if we don't struggle against China diplomatically, there will be absolutely no room for diplomacy. Soong, who himself holds a degree in diplomacy, should be clear about this.
Furthermore, theater missile defense considerations should be based on China's missile threat. If our only purpose is avoiding "provoking China," Taiwan should never have upgraded its military forces, and the direct presidential elections should never have been held. The only way not to infuriate China is by simply accepting "one country, two systems." For the past fifty years we have not only survived under the shadow of "provoking China" but also steadily grown and prospered.
The Koo-Wang talks are a constructive discussion between Taiwan and China, Their scope is even greater than mere political discussion. Our door is always open: the "fits and starts" in the dialogue are a result of China's problems.
After Soong proposed his views on China's policy, he added a conditional clause, saying he will implement them only with the support of all political parties. Theoretically speaking, if Soong leaves the KMT and participates in the presidential election as an independent candidate, the KMT, which has a safe majority in the Legislative Yuan, is unlikely to support Soong to "betray" KMT policies. In other words, Soong's policy proposals can be seen as an empty promise. If Soong becomes president without strong support from the legislature, he will definitely need to take advantage of the right to nominate the premier in order to control the selection of the Cabinet. This will bring about a head-on collision between the directions of executive and legislative policies. Combined with China's verbal and military threats, this conflict may destroy all our achievements accumulated over the past fifty years.
The Washington Post article made references to Soong's view of "democracy and reforms." Soong's submissive attitude towards China will delay China's progress toward democratization while, by diminishing the ROC's sovereignty, it will assist China's power elite in their fight against democracy. The Chinese people's hope to pursue democratization hangs upon the survival and successful operation of the ROC polity. This means that Soong's failure to realize these objectives will bring hope to those Chinese who are pursuing democratization. For national leadership elections, consistency of political views and policies is a basic prerequisite for the people's survival and livelihood.
Lin Yu-siang is the deputy director of the KMT's Department of Policy Research.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
RSS