On his recent trip to Britain, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
Lien's statements remind us of the criticisms he made two years ago on a visit to Washington. On that trip, Lien emphasized that the world would be confronted with a potentially explosive crisis if President Chen Shui-bian (
Without specifying how he would accommodate Beijing in regard to the so-called "one China" principle, Lien pledged in Cambridge that if he wins next year's election, his administration, while countering Beijing's military threat and political pressure, will avoid provoking China in order to maintain regional stability.
Lien's comments also recall the week before the 2000 election, when the KMT launched a series of attacks on Chen. The KMT portrayed Chen as the only candidate who would ignite a war across the Taiwan Strait. In one campaign ad, it warned people not to vote for Chen, otherwise they would have to send their sons to war.
The KMT's incorporation of the so-called "stability card" proved invalid not only because Lien lost the election but also because of the relatively stable situation between Taiwan and China that Chen has been able to maintain since he took office.
The accusation that Chen failed to adopt a more prudent and moderate policy toward China is incorrect. The "five nos" Chen pledged in his inaugural speech opened up a fresh opportunity for Taipei and Beijing to resume dialogue. Chen's later call for both sides to jointly pursue political integration in 2001 should have been treated seriously by the Chinese leaders as a good-will gesture. His administration's gradual opening of the "small three links" was another manifest olive branch. Were these moves not prudent and moderate?
Lien should not overlook the efforts that Chen has made to normalize cross-strait relations. Instead, he should take a close look at how Beijing has sabotaged Taiwan in international arenas such as the World Health Organization and its attempts to downgrade Taiwan's status by buying out Taipei's diplomatic allies.
In a mature democracy, it is often odd to witness a former vice president criticizing the incumbent president so harshly, as if he himself were not a citizen. Former US president Bill Clinton never attacks President George W. Bush over his handling of domestic and foreign affairs. Even former US vice president Al Gore, who lost to Bush by a slight margin, did not point his finger at Bush during his recent trip to Taipei.
Lien's denigration of the Chen administration displays a lack of democratic morality.
Moreover, in any democracy, checks and balances between political parties are normal. A dutiful opposition certainly may criticize the administration and articulate its opinions in order to win the next election. The truth and fairness of its criticisms are open to public judgement. How-ever, it is inappropriate to exaggerate or misinterpret the principle of inter-party checks and balances, let alone attack the government while abroad.
To win public respect and support, the KMT should show the international community the extent to which it can improve on the DPP rather than simply defame the party and Chen. It is therefore shameful to see Lien's loose-cannon behavior amounting to nothing but political trickery.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS