Taiwan has a hard-won democracy, but that does not automatically mean it will last. Citizens must constantly vet those seeking office. Do they walk the walk as well as talk the talk? Perhaps more importantly, what exactly are they talking about?
The past provides cautionary examples. A prime one is chameleon former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良). In the 1970s, he served in the Taiwan Provincial Assembly for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After the Jhongli Incident, he ran as an independent and won the Taoyuan County commissioner seat only to be impeached for “anti-government activity.”
A decade of self-imposed exile and fundraising in the US followed before he would return, be pardoned and serve as chairman of the newly formed DPP.
Hsu proved to be the kind of person who needs to be at the front of the parade no matter who the procession is for.
In the following years, he so frequently switched sides — aligning with the DPP, the KMT, the New Party and even running as an independent — that people would ask: “Who is he with this year?”
Totally different has been former KMT legislative speaker and presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱).
She served the party well and loyally over the years. However, so strong was her pro-China unification talk that even the KMT felt compelled to pull her from the 2016 presidential race and replace her with KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) in his first stint as party chairman.
Then there is former Kaohsiung mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜). Elected in 2018 on the promise of making everyone rich again, he quickly decided that he could run for president using the same message.
He lost and, to the credit of the citizens of Kaohsiung, suffered the ignominy of losing in a recall by more votes than he had received in his original mayoral run.
Against that historical backdrop, the controversies in the upcoming nine-in-one elections add grist for the mill.
In Taipei, KMT mayoral candidate Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) appears to have been hoisted on his own petard.
He touted his expertise in international business and law only to have the opposition point out that he was suspended from practicing law three times and that the “international company” he had worked for was a small firm that dealt with China.
The main spotlight shines on the Taiwan People’s Party’s (TPP) candidate for Hsinchu mayor, Ann Kao (高虹安). Her background reads as: “What could go wrong if a life of privilege is given control of the gravy train?”
Kao is a TPP legislator-at-large, which means she got the position as a reward and not through an election. So what did she do to gain that privilege?
When working on her doctorate at the University of Cincinnati, she received financial aid from the Institute for Information Industry, which expected her to work for it when she finished.
No sooner did she complete the degree than she met with Hon Hai Precision Industry founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) and took a job at his company. This forced the institute to bring up related issues and say that she plagiarized her dissertation from work done within the non-governmental organization.
As a legislator, Kao hired her reported boyfriend Lee Chung-ting (李忠庭) for a staff position where he answers her personal phone. Already drawing a hefty salary at another position, Lee apparently uses his double-dipping for Kao’s personal benefit.
There is something disconcerting in that anyone wishing to reach the legislator must go through her boyfriend. Would he still answer her phone if she became mayor of Hsinchu?
Whistle-blowers have also reported that Lee is not the only one providing “kickbacks.” Kao’s staff are reportedly expected to donate a percentage of their salaries to her campaign fund.
Like a TV drama, the election plot thickened when Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) suggested that TPP supporters in Taipei vote for Chiang, while KMT supporters in Hsinchu vote for Kao.
Jaw has his own interesting background. He helped form the New Party as it broke from the KMT in the 1990s. Does he now want to come in from the cold and seek redemption with the KMT or does he just want to keep his hand in the game?
These are challenges that voters face as they separate the wheat from the chaff in the upcoming elections and ask: Do candidates walk the walk as well as talk the talk?
There is a final question they might ask each candidate: “Have you signed the pledge to never surrender the nation to China?”
I do not think Chiang’s and Kao’s names would be signatories on that list.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS