After his election last month as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman, Eric Chu (朱立倫) led a grandiose delegation of party officials down to Taichung to vilify and spread rumors about Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s only legislator, Chen Po-wei (陳柏惟), to stir up support for a vote to recall Chen. It was a great disappointment to see the leader of the nation’s biggest opposition party behave like this.
Ever since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, democracies around the world have strongly condemned China for concealing facts about the pandemic and shirking responsibility, for its “wolf warrior” diplomacy and for blocking Taiwan’s access to vaccines.
While many countries have responded by donating vaccines to Taiwan, the KMT has chosen to kowtow to China — even echoing Beijing’s sentiments and badmouthing Taiwan’s disease prevention practices, as if it was happy that disaster had struck. The party has become nothing but a representative of red China.
The KMT’s main reason for backing Chen’s recall is because the Taiwan Statebuilding Party is the most strongly pro-independence party on the unification-independence spectrum and it only has one seat in the legislature.
In addition, in April last year, Chen and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators Wang Ting-yu (王定宇), Lin Chun-hsien (林俊憲) and Lin I-chin (林宜瑾) submitted a legislative bill asking the government to change the country name on the cover and personal information page of the nation’s passport to “Taiwan.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in January issued a new version of the passport, with the word “Taiwan” in larger print, stirring up discontent within China and the KMT. Wanting to pick the easiest target, the KMT has aimed its guns on Chen.
A closer look at the KMT’s purported reasons for recalling Chen makes it clear that if these distortions and smears actually constitute legitimate reason for a recall, then every single KMT legislator would likely meet the requirements for being kicked out of office.
The attempt to recall Chen is not just a matter for Chen personally or for the Taiwan Statebuilding Party, but a litmus test to determine if Taiwanese can resist China’s subversion of democracy from within Taiwan through its agents, as the following points show:
First, Citizen Congress Watch’s evaluation of lawmakers’ performance in the first and second sessions of the current legislature showed that Chen was an outstanding legislator.
However, former KMT chairman Johnny Chiang (江啟臣), who had led the KMT’s efforts to recall Chen, is not an outstanding legislator. How is it that a less-than-outstanding legislator can recall an outstanding legislator?
Second, China has been hounding Taiwan by sending its warplanes to intrude on Taiwan’s air defense identification zone. However, the KMT is afraid of criticizing China; instead it has used its whole might to recall Chen, a legislator who is actively defending Taiwan in the legislature’s Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee.
In other words, this recall vote is about Taiwan’s opposition to pro-Chinese forces.
Third, the recall is also a matter of local malicious forces oppressing voters. The residents of Taichung’s second constituency elected Chen only last year, but now someone or some people have realized that they will be no match for Chen in 2024, so they have resorted to this dirty tactic to get rid of him sooner rather than later so that he will not become even more difficult to defeat.
The recall vote on Saturday next week presents Taiwanese with the choice of fighting “red dark evil forces.”
The voters of Taichung’s second constituency made the right choice in January last year, and this time they will once again use their ballots to vote “no” to recall Chen and protect Taiwan’s freedom, democracy and human rights.
Liao I-en is former president of the Central Taiwan Society and a retired professor at National Chung Hsing University’s College of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.
Translated by Perry Svensson
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is