Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), still smarting from his Jan. 11 presidential election pummeling, is careening toward another test: his possible recall.
The residents of Kaohsiung have previously impressed the rest of the nation — for example, they completely transformed the Love River (愛河) from a pitch-black, fetid stench of a waterway to a beautiful, romantic attraction.
Han’s fortunes have changed, from his shock victory in the Nov. 24, 2018, mayoral election — where he defeated his opponent, Democratic Progressive Party candidate Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁), by 150,000 votes — to the presidential election, in which President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) defeated him by 480,000 votes.
It has been quite a ride. Now, people are waiting with bated breath as the residents of Kaohsiung prepare for a potential recall of their mayor: Will they write a new chapter in Taiwan’s history with the first successful recall of a city mayor?
Reach for the popcorn.
Han’s political career of late has resembled an amusement park freefall ride, where you plummet from a precipitous height before you even have time to catch your breath.
His career has perhaps been more like a rollercoaster, hurtling along contorted tracks — one minute accelerating and another deaccelerating, as the car bucks and undulates in time with his political successes and catastrophes.
Nevertheless, it is precisely this type of fickle, disingenuous political hack that people need to resist and weed from Taiwanese politics.
With that in mind, here are five questions to put to the mayor:
First, why has Han stopped his incessant jabbering to journalists, after he wallowed in a media circus during his presidential campaign? When he first took office, he would spout his addled nonsense to a media waiting for the moment he might actually say something of substance.
Second, why has Han ceased his habit of traveling across the nation every other day to attend to business elsewhere, instead of staying in Kaohsiung and getting on with the business of governing?
Third, does Han consider question-and-answer sessions with city councilors to be a right, a duty, or both?
On April 20 and 21, the mayor is to deliver a report to the Kaohsiung City Council and answer their questions. Will councilors wishing to ask him questions be required to draw lots, as they had to in September last year?
Will councilors who have not been chosen be left to sit in silence and watch the proceedings?
The fourth question also concerns next month’s question-and-answer session. Will the mayor, as he did in September last year, turn off his microphone at 6pm on the dot, refuse to take any more questions, declare the proceedings a wrap and promptly leave?
Finally, does Han plan to meet the directors of the Chinese liaison offices in Hong Kong and Macau as he did before?
Of course, with the COVID-19 pandemic, he could hardly travel and meet them in person, but connecting through social media or videoconferencing is a possibility.
He and his laison-office band could discuss the implementation of his “people will flood in, goods will flow out, Kaohsiung will reap the benefits” policy — so long as it is not “confirmed COVID-19 cases flood in, masks flow out, virus outbreaks will cost lots of money.”
Chang Kuo-tsai retired as an associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US