Will the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Kaohsiung City Government succeed in saving Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) from being recalled? If not, it will not be for want of trying.
The initial sally was an attempt to have the recall motion declared invalid by the courts. That failed after the Taipei High Administrative Court on April 17 threw out attorney Yeh Ching-yuan’s (葉慶元) request for an injunction against the vote om June 6.
The next ploy sought to shield Han from facing city councilors who supported the recall by postponing a May 20 question-and-answer session until after the vote — ostensibly in the interest of focusing on the city’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
On Monday, when the mayor was faced with questions on the city’s virus response, a vote by the KMT-majority city council limited the time allotted to questions. The motion also limited questions to party caucuses and unaffiliated councilors so that councilors from smaller parties, such as the New Power Party (NPP), were initially kept from challenging Han.
Eventually, NPP Kaohsiung City councilors Lin Yu-kai (林于凱) and Huang Jie (黃捷) were allowed a few minutes each to pose questions.
Huang asked whether Han would retract his advice to schools that they only allocate two classrooms apiece for polling stations — considered another ruse to suppress the vote.
As she finished asking her question, a bell rang, and Kaohsiung City Council Speaker Lu Shu-mei (陸淑美) of the KMT said that her time was up and told the mayor to submit his answer in writing or to address it later in a news conference.
Huang said that the KMT’s attempts to protect the mayor were not a good look — she was right. The city government seems to be big on bad optics.
Kaohsiung Information Bureau Director-General Cheng Chao-hsin (鄭照新), one of Han’s closest aides, on Tuesday held a news conference with Kaohsiung Environmental Protection Bureau (KEPB) Deputy Director Wu Chia-an (吳家安), Kaohsiung Police Department Deputy Commissioner Chen Shu-tien (陳書田), Kaohsiung Transportation Bureau Chief Secretary Huang Jung-hui (黃榮輝) and Kaohsiung Bureau of Building Affairs Director Chiang Chun-chang (江俊昌). The five of them referred to themselves as the “May Day task force,” formed to refute any anti-Han “distortions.”
They addressed suspicions that pro-recall posters in the city were being removed by the KEPB for purely partisan reasons.
Wu said that the posters were illegal and that the KEPB had similarly removed illegal pro-Han posters — although Aaron Yin (尹立), founder of Wecare Kaohsiung, the group behind the recall petition, said that the actions had been suspiciously “selective.”
The five said that bans against pro-recall ads on transportation were to stop the spread of disinformation, while a ban on handing out anti-Han flyers was to “avoid traffic disruptions.”
Even if their justifications are warranted, having these officials standing on stage with one mission in mind — protecting the mayor — looked a little too coordinated.
Online commentators reacted angrily, claiming that the city government had formed a large rumor mill of its own. One comment used a Yuan Dynasty-era play reference to snow in May, meaning that people had been treated unjustly.
If the comments represent the reactions of eligible voters already angry with Han, the “May Day task force” was not going to persuade anyone, and might have had the opposite effect.
Voters have for too long been bombarded with misinformation and manipulated in the buildup to elections. They are well aware “what time of day it is.”
The KMT would be best advised not to treat Kaohisung residents as fools.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath