The real threat to the ROC
In 1994, when Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) ran for Taipei mayor, his slogan was: “Republic of China to Battle.”
In 2000, the presidential election resulted in the first transition of power. The deep blues were in mourning and thought that it was the end of the Republic of China (ROC).
However, even though Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won two consecutive elections, the ROC continues to exist.
DPP presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) advocates maintaining the “status quo” under the ROC constitutional system and promises to keep peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. In other words, after she is elected, she will not allow those three words — Republic of China — to be extinguished.
Ironically, people within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) continue to chime in with China’s point of view, advocating the idea that there is “one China, with both sides having the same interpretation” of what that China is, that both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to “one China” and that there will be eventual unification with China, without seeming to realize that it would mean the end of the Republic of China. This is because the People’s Republic of China (PRC) replaced the ROC when it joined the UN in 1971 and it became the only government to legitimately represent China.
“One China” means the PRC and that would of course continue to be the nation’s name after unification.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has characterized the ongoing drama within the KMT of replacing the party’s presidential candidate, Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), as a matter of national salvation at a critical moment in time.
To borrow a phrase that Chen often used during his presidency: Is it really that important?
Transitions of power are the norm in a democracy.
Who asked the KMT to get involved in such fierce infighting?
President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration has led Taiwan into a mess, into a terrible condition.
The public wants change: If they cannot do their job properly, the public should change the people and the party in charge, and see if it helps.
Hsu Meng-pi
Taipei
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS