Amid intensifying public anxiety over controversial cuts to the central government budget by the opposition-led legislature, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) on Tuesday last week convened a cross-caucus meeting, hoping to reduce political differences and possibly salvage the budget. However, his comrade — Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崐萁) — skipped the meeting, showing up instead at a travel fair in Hong Kong and even claiming to represent “Taiwan’s central government” at a dinner party with Hong Kong lawmakers and political figures closely associated with China’s United Front Work Department.
Fu said the trip was to promote tourism in his hometown, Hualien, but his prioritizing a meeting with China-sympathetic Hong Kong politicians over a meeting at home to solve a problematic budget that threatens to paralyze the government has sparked wide criticism. His boast about representing the Taiwanese government also revealed his determination to restrain President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration through his domination and manipulation of the opposition-led legislature.
Since being elected as the KMT caucus whip last year, Fu has visited China, including Hong Kong, at least four times. His trips have repeatedly raised concerns about unequal and unjust engagement with China, especially as these trips were followed by further political turmoil that served to promote Chinese interests in Taiwan.
In April last year, despite a strong earthquake and aftershocks severely damaging his constituency, and while the legislature was in session, Fu led a group of pro-China KMT lawmakers to China and met with Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Chairman Wang Huning (王滬寧), joining his host in touting “united front” slogans such as “Taiwan and China are one family,” and “both should recognize the ‘1992 consensus’ and the ‘one China principle.’” After the trip, Fu and his fellow KMT legislators sped up the passage of controversial amendments to expand the legislature’s power — most of which the Constitutional Court later declared were unconstitutional — and intended to amend the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) that is aimed at deterring Chinese infiltration and influence.
Chinese dissident writer Yuan Hongbing (袁紅冰) in February last year warned that communist China’s latest “united front” strategy involves making use of KMT legislators, especially Fu and Han, to introduce bills that would cause chaos in the legislature and reduce the effectiveness of the Democratic Progressive Party government. Fu’s frequent visits to China and the opposition’s successive promotions of controversial laws that have fueled public discontent validate such a warning.
Fu’s China trips have also been viewed as a move to usurp party power so he could become the KMT’s top representative in meeting and interacting with Chinese authorities. For instance, after last year’s legislative elections, Fu declared his intention to compete for the legislative speaker’s seat — in a deliberate move to challenge Han, who had announced his bid the day before. Moreover, since being elected as KMT caucus whip, Fu has frequently sidestepped KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Han to promote his own agenda. These clearly show Fu’s ambition to grab more power.
Not surprisingly, when asked about Fu’s absence at the cross-party meeting, Han said: “Oh, Little Fu? He is really ‘big’ now.”
Likewise, Han skipped a KMT legislative agenda meeting hosted by Fu this week.
A nationwide campaign to recall controversial lawmakers is in full swing. The public should see through Fu’s words and actions that threaten Taiwan’s safety and stability, and be wary of a party dominated by figures who kowtow to China.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS