The problem with sincerity is that it is a difficult quality to distinguish.
This might be to the advantage of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
During a visit with KMT supporters in Taichung on Sunday, Ma, in response to a suggestion that the party should change its name to better represent Taiwan, said the party would consider such a move once it had regained the presidency.
It would be interesting to know what the connection in Ma's mind between regaining the presidency and changing his party's name is.
But then, it may just be that he is preoccupied with the former.
Adding weight to the interpretation that Ma's remark was an automatic response to win support ahead of the legislative and presidential elections is the fact that the very next day he had a change of heart.
When cornered by reporters in Taipei, Ma said that his remark did not necessarily mean that the party had decided that it would ever change its name -- only that it was a possibility.
Chairman of the KMT's Culture and Communications Committee Yang Tu (
"[The remark] was nothing to attach great importance to," Yang was quoted as saying.
Yang's explanation is very enlightening and something that all voters should bear in mind when decoding Ma's comments ahead of the elections. Apparently, if the KMT chairman says something you like, it may be because he really means it -- or it may just be that he is being polite.
Critics of the KMT have long attacked the party for its seeming detachment from the country that has served as its base since 1949.
If Ma truly intends to localize his party, showing respect for the average person would be an excellent way to start.
In other words, Ma should stop peddling the stance that the country's official independence is an option for the Taiwanese people, but not an option for the KMT.
The KMT needs to consider more than just a superficial name change. After all, the country already has a "Taiwan Nationalist Party" -- a political party founded by a group of pro-Taiwan independence activists in July 2005.
Instead, the KMT should try identifying with ordinary voters and talk openly and honestly.
Ma has long been regarded by pan-blue supporters as the most likely candidate to run in next year's presidential election.
As a potential presidential hopeful, Ma ought not to weigh his words so lightly if he hopes to gain respect and support from the public.
As former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher said: "To wear your heart on your sleeve isn't a very good plan; you should wear it inside, where it functions best."
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
In 2025, it is easy to believe that Taiwan has always played a central role in various assessments of global national interests. But that is a mistaken belief. Taiwan’s position in the world and the international support it presently enjoys are relatively new and remain highly vulnerable to challenges from China. In the early 2000s, the George W. Bush Administration had plans to elevate bilateral relations and to boost Taiwan’s defense. It designated Taiwan as a non-NATO ally, and in 2001 made available to Taiwan a significant package of arms to enhance the island’s defenses including the submarines it long sought.
RSS