Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Lin Wei-chou (林為洲) talked about “opposing the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]” in a recent Facebook post, writing that opposing the CCP is not the special reserve of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Not long after, many people within the KMT received a mysterious letter signed “Chinese Nationalist Party Central Committee” containing what looked like a declaration of opposition to, and a call to arms against, the CCP.
Unexpectedly, the KMT’s Culture and Communications Committee came forward with a clarification, saying that the letter was not sent by the KMT and telling the public not to believe this piece of “fake news.”
The committee also warned whoever sent the letter that forging the party’s letterhead and spreading disinformation could be a crime, and called on them to refrain from knowingly breaking the law.
In other words, the KMT thinks that saying it is “opposing the CCP” is fake news and threatens anyone who will listen that spreading that letter would be tantamount to knowingly breaking the law.
Compare that to the era of authoritarian KMT rule, when the party used political propaganda to brainwash Taiwanese into “opposing the CCP, restoring the nation, and liberating and saving their suffering mainland compatriots while the iron was still hot,” and engaged in psychological warfare against Chinese by air-dropping propaganda leaflets in China and proclaiming the sanctity of the “sacred mission to reconquer the mainland.”
Today’s KMT is so gutless that it does not even dare say the words: “Oppose the CCP.”
The KMT’s opposition to the CCP is indeed fake: Wu Sz-huai (吳斯懷) — who in 2016 traveled to Beijing to sit at the feet of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and listen as Xi gave a speech, and then discussed how the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) could develop and project its power — is now a KMT legislator-at-large.
As to the coast guard adding the word “Taiwan” in capital letters to its vessels, Wu was quick to issue a post on Facebook calling the decisionmaking process small-minded and shortsighted, and saying that it belittled national dignity.
He also said that he would be the first to applaud the government if it added the name “China” in capital letters to the vessels before quickly deleting the whole post, and then reposting it after changing “China” to “ROC.”
When his choice of the word “China” raised controversy, he even defended it, saying: “The Republic of China was established before the Chinese Communist Party, so why are they the only ones who can use it while we cannot?”
At any rate, the Republic of China is referred to as the “ROC” and never “China.” If retired lieutenant general Wu, who has held many top army positions, cannot even get the name of his own country right, it is not strange that he sometimes talks out of line and confuses friend and foe.
Considering that the KMT made such a big deal of refuting the mysterious letter signed “Chinese Nationalist Party Central Committee” and calling it “fake news,” while tacitly accepting the many times Wu has humiliated Taiwan and flattered China, makes it clear: Of course the KMT’s opposition to the CCP is fake.
Lin Han is a junior-high school teacher.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS