Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday reiterated that he is “deep-green at heart” and that he would mostly continue President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) national defense and foreign policies if elected.
However, he was still seriously considering forming a “blue-white” electoral alliance with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) less than a month ago, telling students he “hates the KMT, but loathes the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) even more,” while constantly criticizing Tsai’s foreign policy these past few years.
Many critics have said that Ko’s latest remarks were aimed at attracting green-leaning swing voters, as recent polls showed a significant dip in his support after he broke up with the KMT, but they also raise questions of how much of a “political chameleon” he is, and if he has principles and beliefs he actually sticks to.
As the grandson of a 228 Incident victim, Ko had said the things he hates most are “mosquitoes, cockroaches and the KMT” and collaborated with the DPP in winning the Taipei mayoral election in 2014, but he has lost the trust of DPP supporters with his controversial policies and remarks — including that the “two sides of the Strait are one family.” He was no longer supported by the DPP in his 2018 re-election and established the TPP the next year after narrowly winning re-election.
In the past four years, the TPP has tried to position itself as a neutral party on the political spectrum between the “blue” and “green,” or pro-unification and pro-independence camps, with Ko often reiterating that “the blue and green camps are equally rotten,” but at the same time seemingly waging a personal vendetta against the DPP and the Tsai administration.
Ko in 2019 criticized Tsai and her foreign policy as “provoking China,” critiqued an annual national defense budget of NT$400 billion (US$12.75 billion) as being too much, tried to discredit the Tsai administration by claiming that “everyone around Tsai is engaged in corruption,” called the DPP a “one-party dictatorship” in 2020 and this year called the Tsai administration the “biggest scam syndicate.”
Ko’s rhetoric appears to have appealed to many young independent voters, who are frustrated and feel helpless about geopolitical uncertainty and are weary of the long-standing two-party rivalry, which is becoming more polarized due to increased threats from China in the past few years, so they place their hopes on his claims that he and his party could “change” Taiwan and practically solve people’s day-to-day issues.
A report on Taiwan’s election and young voters, published by the New York Times on Monday, cited National Chengchi University olitical science professor Lev Nachman, as saying that “so much of this youth support for Ko Wen-je is really driven not by actual admiration for the man and his policies, but by frustration.”
Although the idea of change might be enticing, not every change is a step forward, especially if the policy is not thoroughly planned out and carefully implemented. Unlike the six-point agreement Ko signed with KMT leaders last month to form an electoral alliance and coalition government, some major government decisions and agreements are irrevocable once settled.
While Ko could shift the blame for his blunders and ineffective policies during his first term as Taipei mayor to being an inexperienced political newcomer, as he has admitted he did not know what he was doing in his first year, he is no longer a novice and must be held accountable for his words and actions.
Swing voters frustrated with the two-party struggle and indifferent to geopolitics might just want change, but change should be made for the better, so they ought to at least take some time to carefully examine if a candidate’s words and actions are consistent and wisely choose a clear path for Taiwan, or else they might find themselves carelessly misplacing their trust in the hands of an opportunist.
With each passing day, the threat of a People’s Republic of China (PRC) assault on Taiwan grows. Whatever one’s view about the history, there is essentially no question that a PRC conquest of Taiwan would mark the end of the autonomy and freedom enjoyed by the island’s 23 million people. Simply put, the PRC threat to Taiwan is genuinely existential for a free, democratic and autonomous Taiwan. Yet one might not know it from looking at Taiwan. For an island facing a threat so acute, lethal and imminent, Taiwan is showing an alarming lack of urgency in dramatically strengthening its defenses.
As India’s six-week-long general election grinds past the halfway mark, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s messaging has shifted from confident to shrill. After the first couple of phases of polling showed a 3 percentage point drop in turnout, Modi and his party leaders have largely stopped promoting their accomplishments of the past 10 years — or, for that matter, the “Modi guarantees” offered in the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) manifesto for the next five. Instead, making the majority Hindu population fear and loathe Muslims seems to be the BJP’s preferred talking point. Modi went on the offensive in an April 21
The people of Taiwan recently received confirmation of the strength of American support for their security. Of four foreign aid bills that Congress passed and President Biden signed in April, the bill legislating additional support for Taiwan garnered the most votes. Three hundred eighty-five members of the House of Representatives voted to provide foreign military financing to Taiwan versus only 34 against. More members of Congress voted to support Taiwan than Ukraine, Israel, or banning TikTok. There was scant debate over whether the United States should provide greater support for Taiwan. It was understood and broadly accepted that doing so
I still remember the first time I heard about the possibility of an invasion by China. I was six years old. I thought war was coming and hid in my bed, scared. After 18 years, the invasion news tastes like a sandwich I eat every morning. As a Gen Z Taiwanese student who has witnessed China’s harassment for more than 20 years, I want to share my opinion on China. Every generation goes through different events. I have seen not only the norms of China’s constant presence, but also the Sunflower movement, wars and people fighting over peace or equality,