In their attempts to secure power and influence within the pan-blue camp, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his People First Party (PFP) counterpart James Soong (宋楚瑜) held their second behind-closed-doors meeting last week. They reached a consensus on several controversial post-election issues, including the possibility of the pan-blue camp forming a new Cabinet, the arms procurement package and the confirmation of President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) Control Yuan nominees.
Under the premise of "respect the institution before policy and personnel," Ma's scheme was to set up a "firewall" to prevent Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) from accepting an alleged offer of the premiership from Chen. By securing support from Soong, Ma attempted to reinforce his position in any talks with the governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) on a Cabinet reshuffle.
On arms procurement, Ma echoed Soong's stance that the budget was both unreasonable in price and procedure.
Finally, citing the example of the nominations for the National Communications Committee (NCC), the two said the nomination procedure for Control Yuan members should be equally strict and transparent.
The conclusions they have reached are not only politically disgraceful but also constitutionally objectionable.
The preemptive strike on Chen's possible invitation to Wang to head the Cabinet reveals Ma's sense of insecurity, despite his party winning a huge victory in the Dec. 3 elections. Ma's personal rivalry with Wang during the KMT chairmanship election also deepened their mutual distrust.
While Ma is worried that Wang's defection might threaten the KMT's legislative majority, Soong is even more eager to dance to Ma's tune and therefore extend his life in politics. Such cooperation is a classic marriage of convenience.
Though political calculations dominated the Ma-Soong meeting, the elevation of partisan interests over national security has had a detrimental effect on the cross-strait situation.
Soong again stressed the pan-blue's opposition to "cash-for-friends" arms procurement because of the cost, the amount of weapons, the types of weapons and the procedure used. Ma agreed that the government should consider buying other weapons rather than the US arms named in the bill.
Ma and Soong have made two grave mistakes.
First, they failed to offer an explanation for how Taiwan is supposed to cope with China's ballooning military budget and growing arsenal. Ma should also have explained to the public why the weapons plan -- passed by his predecessors when the KMT was in power -- is now politically unacceptable.
Moreover, with China's National People's Congress passing the "Anti-Secession" Law in mid-March and authorizing the People's Liberation Army to use force against Taiwan, how can they justify allowing the nation's self-defense capability to be compromised?
Finally, by citing the nomination procedure for the NCC as a "good model" for the nomination system for Control Yuan committee members, Ma and Soong brazenly infringed upon the president's constitutional powers.
A constitutional amendment will be needed if the pan-blue camp wishes to incorporate the NCC model as the method of selection for Control Yuan members.
The proposal was based largely on political considerations because the pan-blue camp can manipulate the selection of committee members in accordance with their majority in the Legislative Yuan.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS