Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Friday attempted to push through two referendum proposals — one opposing the abolition of the death penalty, and another rejecting martial law and war — in the Legislative Yuan, in what appeared to be a desperate move to counter the growing nationwide mass recall movement targeting them.
As of last week, 34 out of the KMT’s 36 district legislators were facing second-phase recall petitions, while the party’s original counter-plan — recall campaigns against Democratic Progressive Party lawmakers — failed to pass the first phase. Compounding the setback, several KMT workers are under investigation for alleged forgery, as many of the submitted petitions included names of unsuspecting or even deceased people.
The KMT said it would prioritize legislation that improves people’s “livelihoods” this session, including giving a “universal cash payment” of NT$10,000 to each resident. KMT legislators have also called for a “mandatory death penalty” for those convicted of child abuse resulting in death. The referendum proposal is just the latest in a series of attempts to win support amid a mounting public backlash.
The KMT’s “anti-martial law” referendum proposal states: “President William Lai [賴清德] has labeled China as a hostile foreign force, and the public is concerned that cross-strait relations might enter a quasi-war,” asking: “Do you agree that the government should avoid war and prevent Taiwan from becoming another Ukraine, where martial law is imposed, young lives are lost and homes are destroyed?”
The other proposed referendum asks: “Do you agree with the policy of a ‘collegiate bench of judges of courts of all levels do not need a unanimous verdict to impose a death sentence?’”
The KMT legislative caucus issued a three-line whip to ensure party discipline in passing the proposals, but heated debate among lawmakers stalled the process. The proposals have been rescheduled for review tomorrow.
Central Election Commission Chairman Lee Chin-yung (李進勇) said the proposals appear “self-contradictory” and illogical, as they seek to ask the government to halt policies that are not being implemented, and might even be illegal or unconstitutional.
The Referendum Act (公民投票法) says that a referendum proposal should “address only one issue,” yet the “anti-martial law and anti-war” proposal combines multiple vague concepts. It also appears aimed to mislead voters into believing that labeling China as a “foreign hostile force” would lead to “quasi-war” — a term undefined in the proposal. It further conflates this scenario with hypothetical notions of invoking “martial law” and “wartime Ukraine” in Taiwan.
The proposal is also a leading question, implicitly urging voters to vote “no” to a mix of concepts under the guise of anti-war messaging, which contravenes the act’s stipulation that “the main text of the proposal must be concise, clear and objectively neutral.”
The proposal against abolishing the death penalty refers to a Constitutional Court verdict last year that requires a unanimous decision among judges to impose the death penalty, which the KMT claims amounts to its “substantive abolition.”
While a Constitutional Court verdict is not equal to the Constitution itself, it has binding legal force and can only be overturned through a constitutional amendment. By framing the verdict as a mere “policy” and proposing a referendum to reject it, the KMT’s approach bypasses proper constitutional procedures.
Although the KMT’s goal is to push for the referendums to be held on the same day as recall voting, hoping to encourage people to support the referendums while voting “no” on recalling its legislators, its proposals might backfire, fueling contempt and strengthening the resolve of recall petitioners aiming to remove KMT lawmakers and put an end to what many see as political theatrics.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS