While I have always appreciated European observation and commentaries on Taiwanese politics as they foster the necessary flow of ideas to sustain a robust democracy and a resilient civil society, the op-ed written by Marcin Jerzewski and Jakub Janda (“Legislative speaker matters for EU,” Jan. 31, page 8) was not one of them. They made questionable assertions about the functioning of Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) politicians.
As a Taiwanese educated in France, I have been showered, by my European friends with sincere care for and unwavering attention to Taiwanese domestic politics and cross-strait relations. I can attest from my own personal experience that Europe is undoubtedly a close, like-minded partner of Taiwan. We are thankful, from the bottom of our hearts, for the friendship we have developed over the years.
As Jerzewski and Janda correctly noted, KMT Legislator Johnny Chiang (江啟臣), while he was chairman of the KMT, engaged in high-level and high-profile interactions with diplomats from European countries. I staffed Chiang’s speaker event with EU Representative to Taiwan Filip Grzegorzewski at the National Policy Foundation in Taipei when I worked as project assistant for the KMT Department of International Affairs.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) is also committed to expanding our relations with Europe. Representatives from 12 European countries joined the KMT in our National Day Celebration last year.
However, the accuracy of Jerzewski and Janda’s article stopped there.
KMT Legislator-at-large Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), while running as the KMT’s presidential candidate in the 2020 election, vowed to pursue balanced external relations. He recognized the importance of befriending important stakeholders of Indo-Pacific security, including the US, China and Hong Kong.
Han met with the head of Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government and director of the Taiwan Affairs Office during his trip to Hong Kong, as he met with then-chair of the American Institute in Taiwan James Moriarty when the latter was in Taipei. None of the meeting minutes were published because of their sensitive nature. That did not make Han a “China appeaser” nor render his meetings in Hong Kong “secretive” in any way.
Former deputy minister for mainland affairs Chang Hsien-yao (張顯耀) said that Control Yuan President Chen Chu (陳菊) did not consult the Mainland Affairs Council either when, as the mayor of Kaohsiung, met with then-Taiwan Affairs Office director Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) in Tianjin in 2013. Was her meeting secretive, by Jerzewski and Janda’s standard, too?
Han’s lack of a strong international profile is not a problem. Having someone with a stronger domestic policy background leading the legislature, which is far from uncommon, has never been a problem for any other legislature around the world.
The KMT’s international affairs experts in Taipei have my full confidence in getting Han up to speed for his future international affairs portfolio.
I can still recall similar criticisms leveled against New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) before he made his trip to the US in September last year. The baseless comments became practically extinct after his successful US trip. Certainly, the legislative speaker has an instrumental role in Taiwanese parliamentary diplomacy. However, just as in any other legislatures around the world, the speaker’s most crucial function is to ensure legislative progress and to be willing to reach across the aisle to form cross-partisan consensus, as clearly demonstrated in Han’s meeting with Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators-at-large, including his former harsh critic, Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌).
Just as any other legislatures around the world, the Legislative Yuan has the right to elect its presiding officer, which is a critical component of the country’s constitutional design to prevent executive abuse of power. The legislative speaker and deputy speaker exercise their power in accordance with the regulations in place; any electee regardless of their political party should forgo past personal convictions and should facilitate Taiwan’s democratic processes in the legislature to its fullest.
Han won the KMT’s nomination and the speakership election fair and square, and would act in accordance with the principle of administrative neutrality.
The conduct of parliamentary diplomacy is well within the discretion of the speaker and co-conveners of the legislature’s Foreign Relations and National Defense Committee. There is no evidence whatsoever to support the claim that executive-legislative tensions would “have a detrimental effect on the efficiency of Taiwan’s parliamentary diplomacy,” as far as parliamentary diplomacy is concerned.
The only way it would produce said effect is if the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its missions overseas decline to assist parliamentary delegations traveling abroad. In that case, it would still not be because of Han’s lack of international affairs experience or his disagreement with the executive branch on foreign policy, but because of the Democratic Progressive Party’s biases against Han.
Jerzewski and Janda’s questionable assertions against Han’s qualifications for the speakership are unfounded, if not outright misleading. It is unfortunate they opted for outdated red scare rhetoric to lead the Taipei Times’ international audience into forming incorrect perceptions about the KMT and its politicians. They went as far as to suggest European politicians would decide to intervene in Taiwan’s domestic affairs upon Han’s election as speaker. I am sure Europe is interested in working with whoever is at the top of the legislature. We invite all those concerned to consult with the KMT.
Han is our legislative speaker. We stand with him.
Howard Shen is assistant director of international affairs for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
The inter-Korean relationship, long defined by national division, offers the clearest mirror within East Asia for cross-strait relations. Yet even there, reunification language is breaking down. The South Korean government disclosed on Wednesday last week that North Korea’s constitutional revision in March had deleted references to reunification and added a territorial clause defining its border with South Korea. South Korea is also seriously debating whether national reunification with North Korea is still necessary. On April 27, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung marked the eighth anniversary of the Panmunjom Declaration, the 2018 inter-Korean agreement in which the two Koreas pledged to
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength
RSS