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.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
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
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
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS