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.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS