President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) on Saturday last week spoke at the opening of the Ching-kuo Chi-hai Cultural Park (經國七海文化園區) and the Chiang Ching-kuo Presidential Library in Taipei.
Despite drawing criticism from all sides for doing so, she was able to kill five birds with one stone.
The first was in the grace and generosity she displayed. Tsai spoke positively about Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) staunchly anti-communist stance, highlighting the ridiculousness of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) position of working with the Chinese Communist Party.
This was a slap in the face to pan-blue camp leaders such as former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), former KMT vice chairman Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) and KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫), who were in the audience and must have felt uncomfortable.
The gesture was also good for national unity, making Tsai look like a president for all Taiwanese, no matter their political views.
A My-Formosa.com poll showed that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has an approval rating of 46.3 percent, compared with a 23.7 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval rating for the KMT.
Tsai showed grace in her capacity as DPP chairperson to enter the library built to honor Chiang. Can anyone imagine Chu walking into the Nylon Cheng Liberty Foundation and Memorial Museum, built in honor of democracy advocate Deng Nan-jung (鄭南榕)?
Nobody is happier than Beijing to see a divided Taiwan, and Tsai has shown herself to be the first to offer an olive branch to her political rivals.
No politician is perfect, and that is certainly true for Chiang. Taiwanese cannot, and should not, forgive or forget his connection to the deaths of democracy advocate Chen Wen-chen (陳文成) and the mother and twin daughters of former DPP chairman Lin I-hsiung (林義雄), or his role in the Kaohsiung Incident trials.
Tsai did not seek to absolve Chiang of his sins. She only recognized his anti-communist stance. In no way should her words be seen as a betrayal of the DPP’s long-held position on Chiang’s autocratic regime.
Second, she showed true grit and self-assurance by walking into the deep-blue lair, where anyone present could make a scene, or even put her personal safety at risk.
Her self-assuredness was in no small part due to her party’s victories last month with the failure of the four referendum proposals and DPP Legislator Lin Ching-yi’s (林靜儀) win in Taichung’s second district legislative by-election.
Third, Tsai has placed the cat firmly among the pigeons in the KMT camp, causing internal turmoil in a party petrified that she, having commandeered the Republic of China (ROC), is going to run off with Chiang, a symbol of the KMT’s glory days.
It is no wonder that former TVBS news anchor Lee Yen-chiou (李艷秋) said: “If even Chiang Ching-kuo has become one of the DPP’s assets, what does the KMT have left?”
This has really hit the pan-blue camp where it hurts.
Fourth, Tsai’s appearance at the park’s opening ceremony shows that she has consolidated her power. Naturally, there are those within the DPP who will criticize her for speaking at the event, but she will hopefully be able to leverage her high level of support — she has a 54 percent approval rating and 53 percent confidence rating, the My-Formosa.com poll showed — to persuade the pro-independence camp and opponents within her party to trust her.
Finally, she might win over moderate blue voters, more of whom view Chiang positively than negatively. If you do not enter the tiger’s lair, how will you steal the cubs?
The KMT often says it holds Chiang in high esteem, but this has become little more than a slogan, as it has essentially abandoned his core values, and it is Tsai who is standing up to the Chinese communists.
The blame lies at the feet of Ma, who during his presidency promised to steer clear of the topics of unification, independence and defense, and since then has gone from “not speaking of unification” to “not ruling unification out.”
Fan Shih-ping is a professor in National Taiwan Normal University’s Department of East Asian Studies.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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