Among the 52 legislative seats secured by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), local factions have obtained 31 and the “blue fighters” 21. This helps us see through the nature of the KMT: a party dominated by local political families and pro-China “blue fighters.”
The “blue fighter” faction is spearheaded by Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康). Other “blue fighters” include Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇), who often made disparaging comments about the government on pro-China media, and Ma Wen-chun (馬文君), who allegedly passed classified material on Taiwan’s indigenous submarine program to South Korea.
Although they acted disloyally to Taiwan, the KMT fully supported Wang and Ma. Younger party members also demanded that KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) step down and be replaced by Jaw, which would doubtlessly increase the power of the “blue fighters” faction.
More terrifying is that Jaw and former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) support a “one China” policy and are against Taiwanese independence. They discount Taiwan’s independence and devalue its autonomy.
Before the KMT started localizing itself, it could not mention ruling party alternations or power balances. Some Taiwanese have been deceived by such slogans. Before the KMT won its 52 legislative seats and became the largest party in the Legislative Yuan, Ma said that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) should be trusted, China intervened in the elections and KMT Vice Chairman Andrew Hsia (夏立言) kowtowed to China. The KMT’s victory is a great challenge to local political parties. Influenced by Chinese video-sharing platforms, Taiwan’s democratic consciousness is under threat.
As long as the KMT denies Taiwan’s sovereignty, it is a foreign political party that does not belong here. Taiwanese should not accept the KMT as a Taiwanese political party. As long as it is pro-China, Taiwanese should stay vigilant. Unless the KMT realizes it has made a mistake and renames itself to something like the “Taiwanese Nationalist Party,” it would remain a foreign political party. The KMT must affirm a “Taiwan first” principle before it is recognized as a Taiwanese political party.
Regrettably, millions of pan-blue camp supporters and KMT members — including former legislative speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), on whom former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) had placed high hopes — have failed to change the KMT. In this pro-China political party, local faction members are obsessed with their own vested interests. They are unaware of their Taiwanese identity and incapable of achieving anything meaningful for Taiwan.
For half a century, under the rule of former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), Taiwanese were forcibly educated to identify as “true Chinese.” The KMT has laid a solid foundation for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It is no wonder why former CCP chairman Mao Zedong (毛澤東) said he would not worry about Taiwanese independence, as Chiang Kai-shek would not allow it to happen. KMT disciples and numerous pan-blue camp supporters would continue fighting Taiwanese independence. The ideation of a “great China” is not anti-CCP at all.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) did not win a legislative majority. While seeking collaboration with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the DPP should not be impeded by the white camp. Instead, it should focus on proposing good agendas and catering to the public’s needs. In doing so, the DPP would gain public support and the TPP would not dare to go against the public will.
Chu Meng-hsiang is former deputy secretary-general of the Lee Teng-hui Democratic Association.
Translated by Emma Liu
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath