Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) dropped a bombshell announcement on Wednesday last week: The party is nominating former premier Simon Chang (張善政) as its candidate for Taoyuan mayor.
The nomination might have come as a surprise to the public, but it completely ambushed the KMT local factions in Taoyuan. Chang was not considered as, or even rumored to be, a potential candidate right up to the announcement.
The list of candidates expected for nomination were KMT legislators Lu Yu-ling (呂玉玲), Lu Ming-che (魯明哲) and Wan Mei-ling (萬美玲), and former KMT Taipei city councilor Lo Chih-chiang (羅智強).
Lo had expressed his intention to run more than a month earlier, but his proposal was met with strong opposition from local factions. Chu reportedly ordered Lo to back out of the race, as he would “never, ever nominate” him.
Believing himself to be as strong a candidate as the others, Lo moved to Taoyuan and resigned as a councilor to demonstrate his resolve.
The KMT gave subtle or direct hints that misled other candidates into running, with many believing that a decision would be made in July.
Lu Yu-ling — endorsed by Taoyuan City Council Speaker Chiu Yi-sheng (邱奕勝) — started putting up billboards with encouragement from the party.
Lu Ming-che, who had the highest approval ratings in opinion polls, also gave his consent if he were to be enlisted by the party.
As a result, the announcement of Chang’s nomination created a backlash, leaving the hopeful candidates reeling. Chiu even left the KMT’s Line groups to express his ire.
So far, Chu’s nomination of Chang can be seen as either the greatest gamble in his political career or his dumbest move as a KMT leader.
With the nomination, Chu is tying his political career to a Chang election victory. If Chang wins in November, then all hail Chu as the omniscient leader, but if he fails, it would be “goodbye Chu.”
On the surface, the move seemed “cunning,” killing three birds with one stone.
First, Lo, a “troublemaker” who refused to heed direct orders from the party, was eliminated. As the nomination came after Lo resigned as councilor, it is hard not to view this as Chu carrying out a personal vendetta, showing his authority over Lo’s insubordination.
Second, the move puts pressure on Chiu. As the head of a local faction, most legislators, city councilors and organizations look to Chiu as their leader, but he has been forced into a position where he must endorse Chang or risk being labeled a “nonadherent.”
Finally, it integrated the voices of the local factions, which favored different candidates. Chu is seeking to keep the factions in line by pushing forward a candidate who stands above the fray.
Chu is eager for the KMT to take back the city from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Despite the KMT’s repeated assertions about the importance of party unity, Chu’s move has only created more chaos for it.
Chang would need to look to Chiu and the local factions to help run his campaign, but Chu’s ruthless maneuver will only win Chang lukewarm support or a cold shoulder.
Taoyuan Mayor Cheng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) of the DPP has had a decent approval rating, so the KMT will need the support of local factions if Chang is to win.
Now that Chu has opened up a can of worms with Chang’s nomination, he will have to quickly mop up the mess to set the campaign on a winning track.
Chu has never been a strong leader, but the fiasco in Taoyuan has only exposed him as nothing more than a paper tiger.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS