In the past few weeks, the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) mayoral candidate for Taipei Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) ancestry has come under attack by several pundits.
Since Chiang threw his hat in the ring, he has been purporting himself as the descendant of the Chiang family to garner support from pan-blue voters.
In January, he said that his name “Wan-an” was given to him by his grandfather — former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) — as a reminder of his ancestral roots. On more than one occasion, he stated that he has always been proud of being a Chiang, and that he would follow in his ancestors’ — Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo — footsteps to make Taiwan a better place. He further underscored this lineage by placing an artistic image of himself with Chiang Ching-kuo, side-by-side, on his mayoral campaign flags.
However, not everyone bought into Chiang Wan-an’s account. On a TV show last week, media personality Clara Chou (周玉蔻) accused former KMT vice chairman John Chiang (蔣孝嚴) — Chiang Wan-an’s father — of falsifying his lineage, speculating that major general Guo Libo (郭禮伯), not Chiang Ching-kuo, was John Chiang’s biological father.
In his new book Inside or Outside the Door, media personality and former chairman of pro-China media outlet Want Daily Huang Ching-Lung (黃清龍) agreed with Chou’s theory, but added that DNA testing would be the most accurate way to find out the truth. He also said that his book had nothing to do with the mayoral campaign.
In response, Chiang Wan-an evaded the allegations, saying that his vision and policies for Taipei, not his ancestry, should be the focus of the campaign.
However, Chiang Wan-an’s conduct so far has shown that he has failed to understand what the public seeks in a suitable candidate. Furthermore, he has treated the Chiang surname like a buffet dinner: taking what he needs from the name while evading the baggage that comes with it.
In fact, a candidate’s ancestry has never been of public concern during elections. However, Chiang Wan-an’s erroneous decision to secure “iron votes” — supporters who share feudalistic sentiment for the two former presidents — by underscoring his ancestry, has invited questions and attacks from the pan-green camp and independent voters.
As the recent plagiarism controversy shows, what voters seek in a candidate is honesty and integrity. If Chiang Wan-an had not emphasized his ancestry throughout his campaign, critics and voters would not have cared about who his grandfather was. To make matters worse, his evasion of the issue raised concern that he could be so cunning and manipulative as to deny Guo — his alleged biological grandfather — and exploit the potential benefits of being a Chiang.
In the face of controversy, if Chiang Wan-an hopes for people to vote for him, his response should have been that people have no choice in who their ancestors are, and that he is the one running for mayor. He should have used his experience in the US and his accomplishments as a legislator to support his credentials for the role.
Chiang Wan-an should bear in mind that a politically laden name is both a burden and a blessing. He should be more aware that the public is seeking a leader with a vision and robust polices, rather than a descendant of a prestigious political dynasty.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
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
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