As the battle between the ruling and opposition parties intensifies, many believe that the KMT and PFP, both adversaries of the ruling party, may become closer. People in favor of KMT-PFP cooperation are especially optimistic, since both parties decided not to join the cross-party task force, directed by Academia Sinica president Lee Yuan-tseh
Closer inspection, however, suggests that advocates of KMT-PFP collaboration may be somewhat naive. Policy differences between the two parties are greater than the possible benefits of collaboration. Although the PFP agrees with the KMT on the issue of national identity, fundamental differences between the parties are destined to keep them apart:
1. The KMT is the majority party in the legislature and has substantial political responsi-bility as a mainstream political force, while the PFP is just a small party capable of functioning, at best, as a critic.
2. During the recent split which saw the PFP formed by disaffected KMT members, the two sides acted like a divorced couple, making irrational accusations against each other. The PFP accused the KMT of getting involved in "black gold" politics, while the KMT accused the PFP of selling out Taiwan to Beijing. Such negative exchanges during the presidential election campaign can hardly be forgotten overnight.
As the majority party in the legislature, the KMT has to shoulder political responsibility and therefore has less room for maneuver. The PFP, conversely, usually makes a point of being flexible on controversial issues in order to avoid negative public reactions. When the KMT, for example, was trying to pass the bill to shorten work hours, lower the ceiling of government bonds to 10 percent, and delete articles that would make high-income senior citizens ineligible for elderly pensions, the PFP tried to maintain a low profile and an indistinct position.
Nasty battles have taken place between the two parties in the past. The KMT boycotted the PFP's proposal for "direct religious links" and accused the PFP of selling out Taiwan to China; the PFP's disgruntlement with KMT business enterprises caused it to accuse the KMT of maintaining ties with "black gold" politics.
For example, the PFP strongly condemned the KMT after Lin Tzong-yeong
The PFP often acts to prove that it and the KMT are different. While KMT and DPP legislators visit China frequently, PFP legislators are hesitant, claiming that Taiwan politicians should think twice before they act.
Although PFP chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) refused to join the cross-party task force, he showed his willingness to participate in the summit of the leaders of the three parties, held by Chen, thus distinguishing himself from KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰), who declined to take part in the summit. Also, in a recent debate between KMT and DPP legislators over the Guidelines for National Unification, the PFP did not support the KMT.
The KMT and PFP are destined to remain apart because of all their differences. They derive their electoral support, moreover, from very similar groups of people. How well the two parties could collaborate once the election season rolls round again is extremely questionable.
Julian Kuo is an associate professor of Political Science at the Soochow University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS