Voters were treated to a livestreamed event on Tuesday that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) called an “opposition leaders’ summit,” with the slogan “Bring democracy back to Taiwan.”
The event starred KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) and TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), who discussed political reform, the ongoing mass recall movement and the economic challenges of US President Donald Trump’s tariffs. The event was transparently self-serving, a political broadcast full of fictions and distractions, of use to nobody but the KMT, which is caught in the headlights of the oncoming recall train.
Chu got what he wanted out of it: He had Huang reiterate the point — so that he did not have to — that Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) proposal to “bring down the Cabinet” would do no good. Chu got Huang to say that the real target should be the resignation of the person they want voters to believe poses a threat to Taiwan’s democracy: The “dictatorial” President William Lai (賴清德), the figure behind the “green communism” who “wants to reinstate martial law.”
The KMT has no idea how to respond to the mass recall movement and it is panicking. Chu faces losing not only his chairmanship, but also the legislative majority that he and his party have abused since February last year. Huang and his merry band of TPP legislators-at-large have been riding the KMT’s coattails, a position Huang does not want to risk losing.
Is the electorate really so disgruntled with Lai that it is baying for him to step down? Or is it Chu — who for some reason did not expect Lai to have the mental or political resources to push back against the legislative chaos that the KMT and TPP have brought — who wants Lai removed?
As Chu has resorted to peddling blatant fictions in a clumsy attempt to create a narrative untethered to what is happening, opinion polls could provide a reference.
As reported in the blue-leaning China Times, the results of a survey conducted late last month by z.media showed a 51.6 percent approval rating for the Lai administration. In terms of party political support, 35.8 percent of respondents backed the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), 20.1 percent the KMT and 11.1 percent the TPP.
Respondents were overwhelmingly positive about the government’s decision to deport social media influencers who advocated for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan: 65 percent, including many KMT supporters, expressed approval of the deportations. However, they were underwhelmed by the KMT’s proposal for a referendum against “martial law” that Chu wants people to believe Lai is reinstating, with 50.3 percent expressing disapproval.
Clearly, it is only Chu, Huang and their followers who believe Lai is behaving in a dictatorial way, or should be asked to resign.
A Mirror Media opinion poll conducted this month showed that 40 percent supported the DPP, compared with 16.9 percent for the KMT and 14.2 percent for the TPP. Lai’s administration received an approval rating of 49.3 percent. Asked about the performance of Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰), 43.5 percent said they were satisfied.
On Lai’s response to Trump’s tariffs, 39.4 percent of respondents said they were satisfied, compared with 46 percent who were not. Voters are clearly concerned about this issue. So it is no surprise that Chu and Huang focused on the government’s response to Trump’s tariffs in their “summit.” They needed at least one credible nail on which to hang voter dissatisfaction with the Lai administration. Peddle away, Chu and Huang. Nobody is buying your desperate fictions.
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS