“Taiwan is currently facing a series of challenges in the form of global competition, economic stagnation, the wealth gap, insufficient distributive justice [and] a deteriorating quality of life, but the greatest danger is that political infighting and rampant populism is causing national development to get bogged down.”
Is this the same old criticism of the government from the opposition camp? No, it is part of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu’s (洪秀柱) nomination speech.
Hung’s comments on the political situation reflect figures that show during the KMT’s seven years in government, the nation’s fiscal deficit has worsened. The average annual deficit since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office has exceeded NT$270 billion (US$8.6 billion). The nation’s real debt is NT$7 trillion and hidden debt stands at NT$24 trillion, which puts overall debt at 1.5 times GDP.
The worsening fiscal deficit has caused Taiwan to drop from 46th to 80th on the World Economic Forum list — as the debt burden averages out to NT$1.08 million for each Taiwanese. Last year, youth unemployment for the 20 to 24 age group stood at 13 percent, and among all OECD countries, the Taiwanese situation deteriorated fastest. This year, Taipei’s ratio of house prices to income became the world’s highest, while wages have fallen back to the levels of 16 years ago. Comprehensive income tax data from 2013 also show that the difference between the poorest 5 percent and the richest 5 percent in Taiwan has expanded.
Despite the government’s performance, Ma continues to be pleased. He told the KMT’s National Congress that he had “not let Taiwan down over the past seven years.”
Hung’s commentary on the political situation was in fact the best possible evaluation of the government’s performance. Ma is the weakest president in the history of the KMT.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) might have served as vice premier and vice party chairman in the past, but his position is the same as that of a local government leader. In the past, the KMT chairman was president and had full control over the party, government and army. These days, Chu has to pay his respects to higher officials if he wants to attend a Cabinet meeting.
Chu used to be the KMT’s most popular politician, but at the time his party was looking for presidential nominees, he was unwilling to step forward, nor was he able to persuade any other powerful party members to throw their hat in the ring.
In the end, second-tier Hung became the party’s candidate, as Chu’s popularity dropped further. In order to drown out the competition and pave the way for Hung’s nomination, the party expelled five dissenting members, violating democratic principles. The result has been that people both within and outside the KMT have come to think even less of Chu, making him perhaps the weakest KMT chairman in history.
In every public opinion poll since she registered her candidacy, Hung has fallen far behind Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). She even falls behind People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), making her the weakest presidential candidate the KMT has ever put forward.
With the weakest president ever and the weakest party chairman ever campaigning for the party’s weakest candidate ever, the only thing the party has going for it is its assets. Does Hung still fancy her chances?
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS