The formation of a “blue-white” alliance between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) for next year’s elections had been delayed for months. Yet the two parties have once again dragged the game into overtime.
After bickering over which methods to use, the two parties on Wednesday finally agreed to a joint presidential ticket using public and internal polling to decide who among New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) of the KMT and TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) would be the presidential candidate and who would be their running mate. The result was to be announced yesterday.
A closed-door meeting attended by Ko, Hou, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) and former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who was acting as a witness, was held on Wednesday. The four men signed a document agreeing to six points. Point three stated that if Hou or Ko won by more than the statistical margin of error, they would get one point, but if the result was within the margin of error, the Hou-led ticket would gain one point. The details of the agreement were hazy, but many people believed that it was more favorable toward Hou. The TPP and Ko immediately faced criticism from supporters asking why Ko had conceded to “unfair” terms.
The two parties yesterday surprised the public by announcing that further negotiations were needed, as they had failed to agree on how the polls should be interpreted — having different understandings of what “statistical margin of error” meant.
The KMT said that the difference in support for a Hou-led ticket and a Ko-led ticket was within the margin of error for five polls, so the Hou-led ticket won five points from six polls, while the TPP said that it has agreed to a margin of error of 3 percent, which it interpreted as plus or minus 1.5 percentage points, so the Ko-led ticket had won three points from six polls, resulting in a draw.
The outcome of the alliances’ joint ticket is again up in the air, and the deadline for candidates to register with the election commission is Friday. Voters should take a hard look at the absurdity of the “blue-white” alliance and re-evaluate its ability to govern.
Ko’s remarks over the past few days should serve as a warning to his supporters regarding the TPP’s one-person decisionmaking mechanism and Ko’s suitability as a leader. Ko once said the things he hates the most are “mosquitoes, cockroaches and the KMT.” He also said the TPP aims to surpass the “green-blue” political divide and create a new political culture, and called for an “open and transparent” democratic government. He betrayed the TPP and his supporters by signing the agreement on Wednesday.
After signing the agreement during a closed-door meeting, contrary to Ko’s constant call for transparency, he admitted that he had overruled a collective decision made by his aides, but said he was “ambushed” by the KMT, and that the TPP would monitor the KMT’s governance if a Hou-led ticket won the election. That is strange, as he is proposing that the vice president monitor the president.
Ko even said he would attend further negotiations with a team of party members, as he is “easily duped” when alone.
Just three days after the KMT and the TPP hailed the agreement as a “historical moment,” the poll result announcement proved their alliance to be just as ambiguous as the so-called “1992 consensus” — a term former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) in 2006 admitted making up in 2000, referring to a tacit understanding between the KMT and the Chinese government that both sides of the Strait acknowledge there is “one China,” with each side having its own interpretation of what “China” means.
The TPP and KMT only have an understanding on “removing the Democratic Progressive Party from power,” but seem to have their own interpretations as to what that means.
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support
RSS