People who have misgivings about former president Lee Teng-hui (
Lee was not invited to the 16th national congress. Even the former chairman's son-in-law, Lai Kuo-chou (
The KMT has expelled people such as Lin Yang-kang (
The KMT is an authoritarian party in the mold of the Soviet Communist Party. Little wonder then that the party's old guard has had so much difficulty adapting to democracy. Instead of using rational debate to persuade party members to support Lee's expulsion, they resort to emotional blackmail of the party chairman -- a clear sign of an authoritarian mindset. Their failure to understand that the times have changed and that different strategies are needed now, is as much a tragedy for the KMT as for themselves.
In an age of democratic politics, everything has to be decided by majority support. If most of the people in the KMT supported expelling Lee, Lien would have been able to jettison him by now. But Lee represents the mainstream political path that is supported by a majority of the people of Taiwan. The KMT's sprawling party machine and massive resources cannot give Lien the power he needs to challenge Lee head-on in the face of democratic opposition.
Democratic politics remain a foreign language for the dinosaurs of the KMT who long for a return to the dynastic politics of the Chiangs. Instead of trying to pacify them, pity or change them, the KMT would be better served by treating them simply as museum pieces too dusty for display. Respect for one's elders is a worthy tradition. But respect should include a willingness to prevent one's elders from hurting or embarrassing themselves.
The party congress was a public relations disaster both for Lien and the KMT. Instead of emerging re-energized with a new image and policy platform, the KMT proved it is not much more than a shell of its former self -- still chained to policies and people that toppled it from its throne in the first place.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
RSS