A heated conversation between a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Keelung city councilor and a local resident on whether an ammunition depot in the city should be relocated has stirred debate about public attitudes toward national security in Taiwan, and has drawn speculation on the KMT’s cross-strait stance.
After nine soldiers were injured in a blast at the Hsiang Feng military base depot in Keelung on Monday, KMT Keelung City Councilor Lu Mei-ling (呂美玲) on Tuesday visited a local market to hear residents’ opinions with a reporter in toe.
Lu’s suggestion of relocating the depot to Yilan or New Taipei City was met with dissent by a resident in his 60s, surnamed Lai (賴), who said that the depot has been there for decades, protecting people from invasion, and asked: “If it is removed, where would we get ammunition if communist China attacks us?”
Lai said the depot provides ammunition to the navy’s 131st Fleet and artillery at Keelung Harbor, and relocating it would place the ammunition too far away to reach it in time if China suddenly attacked, so the depot must stay, as it is protecting Taiwan.
“Why do you want to have war? Just like the US and Ukraine...” Lu asked. Lai replied: “I do not want a war. It is communist China that wants to wage war against us.” Lu then pointed a finger at him, saying that “communist China does not want to attack, it is you who is asking for it. If the Chinese military had plans to attack Taiwan, they would have done it earlier. You are asking for a beating.”
She also tried to intimidate Lai by saying that “eligibility for military call-up can be up to 75 years old,” and “if a war starts, do not forget that you must fight on the front line,” to which Lai said that he would surely stay and fight the Chinese troops.
In an interview on Thursday, Lu said: “If you [the government] are asking for a beating, we in Keelung want independence. If the Republic of China (ROC) does not take care of Keelung residents, we will ask the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to take care of us.”
Lu on Friday said that Taiwan should not follow in the US’ footsteps and ruin its future, but the KMT said that her remarks contravened its charter and had damaged its reputation. In the evening, Lu apologized for her “slip of the tongue” and resigned from the party.
While the KMT quickly distanced itself from Lu, people noticed that her attitude toward national security and cross-strait relations is not markedly different from that of many higher-ranking KMT figures and pan-blue political parties, as well as Beijing’s stance.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) has said that President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) refusal to acknowledge the so-called “1992 consensus” is a “great provocation” to Beijing, and KMT Legislator Shen Chih-hwei (沈智慧) has said that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s frequent reports of Chinese military aircraft entering Taiwan’s air defense identification zone arer provoking Beijing, and that it is eager to stir up cross-strait tensions.
Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘), who sought the KMT’s presidential nomination earlier this year, wrote in an op-ed piece published by the Washington Post on July 17 that Tsai’s and the DPP’s rejection of the “one-China” framework has greatly aggravated the risk of war.
The KMT’s constant claims that it would safeguard the ROC is concerning, but refusing to highlight the source of the threat to Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific region, and even siding with Beijing in saying that the DPP-led government’s efforts to strengthen national defense and form partnerships with democracies are provocative actions that invite war.
Lu’s blunt “you’re asking for a beating” simply highlights the party’s attitude toward national defense, and her false claim that military call-up includes men up to 75 years old clearly examplifies how disinformation can be used to wage “cognitive warfare” to try to influence the public.
The cancelation this week of President William Lai’s (賴清德) state visit to Eswatini, after the Seychelles, Madagascar and Mauritius revoked overflight permits under Chinese pressure, is one more measure of Taiwan’s shrinking executive diplomatic space. Another channel that deserves attention keeps growing while the first contracts. For several years now, Taipei has been one of Europe’s busiest legislative destinations. Where presidents and foreign ministers cannot land, parliamentarians do — and they do it in rising numbers. The Italian parliament opened the year with its largest bipartisan delegation to Taiwan to date: six Italian deputies and one senator, drawn from six
Recently, Taipei’s streets have been plagued by the bizarre sight of rats running rampant and the city government’s countermeasures have devolved into an anti-intellectual farce. The Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office has attempted to eradicate rats by filling their burrows with polyurethane foam, seeming to believe that rats could not simply dig another path out. Meanwhile, as the nation’s capital slowly deteriorates into a rat hive, the Taipei Department of Environmental Protection has proudly pointed to the increase in the number of poisoned rats reported in February and March as a sign of success. When confronted with public concerns over young
Taiwan and India are important partners, yet this reality is increasingly being overshadowed in current debates. At a time when Taiwan-India relations are at a crossroads, with clear potential for deeper engagement and cooperation, the labor agreement signed in February 2024 has become a source of friction. The proposal to bring in 1,000 migrant workers from India is already facing significant resistance, with a petition calling for its “indefinite suspension” garnering more than 40,000 signatures. What should have been a straightforward and practical step forward has instead become controversial. The agreement had the potential to serve as a milestone in
China has long given assurances that it would not interfere in free access to the global commons. As one Ministry of Defense spokesperson put it in 2024, “the Chinese side always respects the freedom of navigation and overflight entitled to countries under international law.” Although these reassurances have always been disingenuous, China’s recent actions display a blatant disregard for these principles. Countries that care about civilian air safety should take note. In April, President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) canceled a planned trip to Eswatini for the 40th anniversary of King Mswati III’s coronation and the 58th anniversary of bilateral diplomatic
RSS