Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) on Sunday posted a video on Facebook to tout his determination to reform the party, dressed as renowned military strategist Zhuge Liang (諸葛亮) of China’s Three Kingdoms Period, but armed with a tablet computer and manipulating digital data projected in front of him.
It was part of Chiang’s attempts to overhaul the party’s image, to appeal — albeit in a clumsy and patronizing way — to a younger generation of voters, who he believes are instrumental to transforming how the party is seen by the electorate.
In another Facebook post, Chiang said that the KMT used to be very young, and that it does not necessarily need to be associated with old people and outdated ideas.
It is true that the KMT used to be very young, but it was not young in Zhuge’s day. It would not exist for another 17 centuries after he died. The association, of course, was an attempt to tie the party to a recognizable motif representing traditional Chinese culture.
Chiang is clearly signaling this linkage. Do not expect a change to the party’s name or its connections with China under his watch.
The juxtaposition of the tablet computer was obvious enough. Chiang wants more input from younger party members, but if he gets it, he would have to act on it. It cannot result only in superficial changes to the party’s image.
If he hopes to achieve substantial change with help from a younger generation, and not elicit a backlash from the party’s old guard, he needs the kind of strategic genius that Zhuge himself would have envied.
He is also going to have to move quickly. He won the chairmanship in a by-election after former chairman Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) fell on his sword to take responsibility for the party’s defeats in the Jan. 11 presidential and legislative elections. The next full chairmanship election is due next year.
Chiang is seeking to transform the party’s image using a two-pronged approach: recruiting the younger generation, while also preventing embarrassing gaffes by elected KMT representatives.
One example of the latter is KMT Legislator Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷), who has been giving Chiang quite a headache with a string of controversial statements and requests in the legislature.
Chiang favors gentle persuasion to inform errant representatives of the error of their ways, backed up by the party disciplinary committee should they fail to comply, but Wu has failed to comply.
Chiang is now mooting a new mechanism to remove legislators-at-large deemed to be damaging the party’s image.
Chiang has said before that the older generation within the party is supportive of reform. That was before the younger generation proposed any new ideas. If he fails to make changes based on this input, he would be seen as fraudulent for failing to take the younger members seriously.
If he makes changes that anger influential individuals or interest groups within the party, he could lose the chairmanship next year. If he balks at reigning in Wu, other legislators could feel emboldened to continue acting as they see fit. He would also be seen as procrastinating or spineless, which would only make his job more difficult.
If Chiang acts too decisively and throws the book at a stubborn Wu, he is going to send a signal that many loyal party members would find deeply concerning. More importantly, Wu is just the most visible entrenched problem among proponents of the old KMT mindset.
Voters must wait and see how effectively Chiang can channel Zhuge’s genius in the coming months.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS