The first inklings that Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was going to nominate New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) as the party’s presidential candidate over Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) came when KMT Taipei City Councilor Chin Huei-chu (秦慧珠) early yesterday morning wrote on Facebook: “Congratulations Hou You-yi, many thanks to Terry Gou, bless the KMT! Go, go, go.”
Gou’s supporters flooded Chu’s Facebook page with frantic pleas of support for Gou’s candidacy, saying that they could never support Hou for president if Gou were left out in the cold.
Former KMT legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) had predicted that Gou would respond in one of three ways: two that would be good for party unity, and one damaging to it. The latter would be Gou reacting in anger to a perceived slight from Chu, avoiding the KMT Central Standing Committee meeting in the afternoon and considering standing as an independent or teaming up with Taiwan People’s Party Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on a joint ticket.
This could have led to a repeat of the 2000 election, when Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won after a disgruntled James Soong (宋楚瑜) split the pan-blue vote and blocked former KMT chairman Lien Chan’s (連戰) path to power.
As it happened, Gou reacted to the official confirmation of Hou’s nomination with a promise to offer his support and work to facilitate victory for Hou.
He is right to do so. This makes it easier for Chu and the KMT to secure the unity they make so much of at every major election, simply by virtue of the difficulty in achieving it.
It would certainly be interesting to see how the party old guard get behind Hou, as he has never been regarded as one of the party elite, and was born and bred in Taiwan: The KMT has traditionally kept “local” figures with no links to China very much at arm’s length.
Hou was the right choice. With his business bravado and lack of political experience, Gou was too much of a political wild card. The president of Taiwan needs to be very skillful on the domestic and international stages.
Hou has proven to be of sufficient mettle domestically; he is very much untested internationally.
Responding to news of Hou’s official nomination, Ko told former New Power Party legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) during a radio broadcast that Hou’s biggest problem is that nobody has any idea what his stance is on cross-strait relations.
At least on this front, Hou has an advantage over the DPP’s candidate, Vice President William Lai (賴清德). If he is elected president, Beijing is likelier to talk to him, assuming he continues the KMT’s longstanding recognition of the so-called “1992 consensus.” Conversely, China is unlikely to show any interest sitting at the negotiating table with Lai.
Herein lies the problem with Hou’s reticence at confirming his stance thus far: He might be committed to protecting the Republic of China and the territorial integrity of Taiwan proper, Kinmen, Matsu and the Penghu islands, but that position is essentially Taiwan independence by another name — and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot be expected to buy a minute of that.
The die is now cast, and it is up to Taiwanese and the media to scrutinize Hou’s plans and preparations for taking on the Chinese Communist Party.
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
An American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) spokesperson on Saturday rebuked a Chinese official for mischaracterizing World War II-era agreements as proving that Taiwan was ceded to China. The US Department of State later affirmed that the AIT remarks reflect Washington’s long-standing position: Taiwan’s political status remains undetermined and should only be resolved peacefully. The US would continue supporting Taiwan against military, economic, legal and diplomatic pressure from China, and opposes any unilateral attempt to alter the “status quo,” particularly through coercion or force, the United Daily News cited the department as saying. The remarks followed Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently sat down for an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson in which he openly acknowledged that ChatGPT’s model behavior is indeed influencing the entire world, and that he himself is responsible for the decisions related to the bot’s moral framework. He said that he has not had a good night of sleep since its launch, as the technology could bring about unpredictable consequences. Although the discussion took place in the US, it is closely related to Taiwan. While Altman worries about the concentration of power, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has already weaponized artificial
RSS