In a recent interview, United Microelectronics Corp founder Robert Tsao (曹興誠) urged candidates running in the November local elections to clarify their stance on cross-strait issues. Inspired by Tsao’s idea, leaders of several pro-independence groups called on candidates to sign a pledge to “defend Taiwan’s security, fight against aggression, and never surrender in the face of invasion, coercion or threat of a Chinese invasion.”
In response to the pledge, the three main Taipei mayoral candidates — Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安), Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) and independent candidate Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) — had contrasting attitudes.
Chiang considered signing the pledge “idiotic” as he said he believed every citizen would fight in the event of a Chinese invasion, which makes the pledge meaningless. Instead, he suggested that the DPP ask the public to sign a pledge to abide by the Republic of China Constitution.
Chen said that signing would be a demonstration of stance and attitude. As an elected leader, he said he believed he should set an example.
Huang said she had no issue signing the pledge, but reiterated that people should focus on policies and citizens’ welfare. This was a slap in the face of her former supervisor, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), who is the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) chairman, who said that he “could not give a damn” and refused to sign the pledge.
As China continues to intimidate Taiwan, talks of appeasement and capitulation are rife within Taiwan. Consequently, the “never surrender pledge” is a measure aimed at those fence-sitters — mainly pan-blue politicians — who claim to love Taiwan while promoting talk of surrender, making a clear stance of their loyalty. As nearly 90 percent of the public identify as Taiwanese, signing the pledge is a means to assure the public that once elected, these politicians would stand resolutely with Taiwan.
Huang has grasped the public’s sentiment and her decision could garner support from pan-blue voters. However, her response caused people to question her motive because of her close affiliation with the TPP and Ko, who has a reputation as a political chameleon.
Chiang marginalized himself within the mayoral election campaign with his response. By refusing to tackle the question head-on, he has opened up a can of worms with the alternative. According to the KMT’s interpretation of the Constitution, Taiwan should seek unification by “retaking the mainland,” and it is the DPP that contravenes the Constitution by seeking to change the “status quo” and pushing a pro-independence agenda. The KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CPP) have the goal of unification in common, yet differing ideas about who should rule.
Chiang has overlooked that China has outgunned Taiwan, so to stick to the old dream of his great-grandfather, Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), is delusional. Chiang’s disdain of signing the pledge has made himself a poster boy for the CPP’s propaganda and has not given pro-Taiwan supporters the respect they deserve, painting them as “idiots.”
Without leaders such as Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy staying to defend their nation, Ukraine could have fallen. What Taiwanese would like to know is quite simple: Would those in power safeguard Taiwan, or run as soon as the situation goes south? If signing a pledge proves to be too sensitive, perhaps it would be too much to expect these politicians to take up arms and fight if war breaks out.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS