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.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS