There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied.
Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party?
The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote.
It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated budget and has brought about a worsening of cross-strait relations.
The KMT has formed a strong opposition coalition with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding a majority that claims to represent 60 percent of the vote and stands on the same side with the general public.
The KMT has tried to please the electorate by proposing a universal cash payout.
It advocates for frequent exchanges with China as “the two sides of the Strait are one family.”
It has pushed through several “reform” bills it claims are “beneficial” to the nation, and saved the public from a huge military budget, personnel costs and operating expenses for four branches of the government.
Notably, it has not done anything to cut the operating budget for the Legislative Yuan.
It also passed a bill to amend the Criminal Code to subject those found in contempt of the legislature to criminal proceedings in a bid to “alleviate the burden” of the Judicial Yuan, while rejecting all seven judicial nominees for the Constitutional Court.
It has pushed through amendments to the National Communications Commission Organization Act (國家通訊傳播委員會組織法), affecting the normal functioning of the commission.
Facing such a sound “supervision,” the premier has not behaved, it says.
Instead, he has asked for reconsiderations and constitutional interpretations of the bills passed by the legislature.
Enough is enough.
The premier apparently does not know his place, choosing to do things the hard way instead of just letting the legislature get its way.
What is it, then, that is stopping a strong opposition camp like the KMT and the TPP, which holds a majority in the legislature and has wide public support, from proposing a no-confidence vote?
The reality is that the opposition is well-aware that the next step after proposing a vote of no confidence would be to dissolve the Legislative Yuan.
After that, snap elections would have to be called.
From the perspective of the TPP, none of its candidates won constituency seats in the legislative elections last year.
Things could not get worse in a re-election. It would be considered a huge gain if it could grab one or two seats.
Regarding legislator-at-large seats, the party could definitely secure support from its die-hard fans, as TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) decried the “political persecution” of the party’s former chairman, Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), who is being detained for alleged corruption-related offenses.
A re-election would allow Huang to foster his charisma and authority in the post-Ko era, while also appealing to the party’s supporters to make political donations by pretending it is in desperate financial need.
Why would it not do so when it could kill two birds with one stone?
From the perspective of the KMT, as the DPP only has 40 percent public support, the number of seats it would hold after a re-election would drop from 51 to 45, or 40 percent of the total of 113 seats.
Meanwhile, the KMT would secure 58 seats, the TPP eight at-large seats, and two seats would be held by KMT-sympathetic independent candidates.
In other words, the KMT would hold a majority on its own. It would be invincible in the legislature.
A promising future is within easy reach. The leaders and politicians of the KMT and the TPP should be confident enough to propose a no-confidence vote, dismiss the legislature, call a re-election and witness the latest public opinion.
Let us turn a new page in history. How about it?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Fion Khan
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS