Taipei City Councilor Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇) has been nominated as the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate for a legislative by-election in Taipei. The seat belonged to Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安), who was voted Taipei mayor last month. Her sole rival for the position is the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Enoch Wu (吳怡農).
Wang said she already knows how she would attack Wu. Wu said he would run a clean campaign, focusing only on the issues, and steering clear of gossip and smearing his opponent.
For some, Wu’s apparent commitment to a fair fight will come as music to the ears, but for others it will be a matter of concern. Smear tactics work, especially when they involve a candidate preaching to the choir, but they plant niggling doubts in the minds of undecided voters.
Wang has launched her opening salvo, trying to associate Wu with gangsters. The allegation itself is absurd, but that is not the point, as she is not appealing to neutral voters’ rational evaluative skills.
There are also other reasons for casting such negative aspersions.
The first is that she wants to force her opponent onto the back foot, in the hope that he would respond to the allegations and thereby lose control of his preferred narrative.
Wu said he wants to focus on the issues, but right from the get-go he has found himself responding to fantastical accusations. He should avoid doing that.
He might want to look to two results from last month’s local elections, and how much mudslinging harmed some candidates from the DPP, the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP).
The DPP’s initial candidate for Taoyuan mayor, Lin Chih-chien (林智堅), was forced to withdraw from the race after allegations were raised, by Wang herself, concerning his plagiarism of a paper submitted for a master’s program at Chung Hua University. The allegations, while politically motivated, did hold water, and Lin’s candidacy was sunk.
The DPP then began throwing plagiarism allegations at TPP Hsinchu mayoral candidate Ann Kao (高虹安) and KMT Taoyuan mayoral candidate Simon Chang (張善政). Kao, especially, was beset by a constant barrage of accusations of plagiarism and corruption. Both Chang and Kao won their elections. Significantly, they had both chosen not to respond overly to the allegations, or be sidetracked from their own campaign messaging. Although Kao is still subject to investigations as a result of the allegations, it seems that voters either saw through the political mud-slinging or simply did not care.
Wu should be aware of the saying, “the best defense is a good offense.” He should look at what Wang is trying to defend, and what she is trying to distract him from.
It would be neither underhanded nor a smear tactic for Wu to bring up the KMT’s attack on his party’s Taipei mayoral candidate, Chen Shih-chung (陳時中), for resigning as minister of health and welfare to concentrate on his campaign, accusing him of “running away” from his responsibilities.
Wang has opened herself up to accusations of hypocrisy, having agreed to stand for Chiang’s newly vacated legislative seat and “running away” from her responsibilities as a freshly re-elected Taipei city councilor.
Even though in the local elections the voters seemed unimpressed with the DPP’s staunchly anti-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) stance, Wang is clearly seeking to distract the narrative from her clearly pro-CCP persona, put on full view during an appearance in 2020 on the talk show The Two Sides of the Taiwan Strait (海峽兩岸) aired by China’s state broadcaster China Central Television.
If Wu wants to keep his campaign clean, he should trust the wisdom of voters, and not let himself get drawn into responding to absurd attacks.
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 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
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
RSS