At a meeting of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) Central Standing Committee on Wednesday, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) drew parallels between the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) under President William Lai (賴清德) and the fascism of Germany under Adolf Hitler and Italy under Benito Mussolini.
After being strongly condemned by several foreign representative offices for his comments, including the German Institute Taipei and the Israel Economic and Cultural Office in Taipei, Chu did not correct his mistake. Instead, he doubled down, accusing foreign governments of “interfering in the internal affairs of other countries.”
His response is all too familiar — it is identical to the catch-all phrase the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has used for years to deflect international criticisms of its human rights abuses, military harassment of Taiwan and disruption of the international order. As the chairman of the main opposition party in Taiwan’s democratic system, Chu’s remarks reveal critical errors in his understanding of three things — his political role, history and the international context.
Chu seems to have forgotten that the KMT is an opposition party — it does not hold state power, nor is it the leader of Taiwan’s “internal affairs.” The responses to his comments from foreign representative offices were meant to correct his egregiously inappropriate comparison, not to interfere with domestic politics. Such international interactions are normal in a democratic society, and are a fundamental part of upholding historical memory, human rights and dignity. In reality, accusing others of “interfering in internal affairs” is both an overstep of Chu’s political role and a shirking of political responsibility.
Equating a democratic leader like Lai with Hitler is not only absurd, but also rubs salt on the historical wounds of Europe and the Jewish community. The genocide and countless wartime atrocities committed by the Nazi regime are a memory shared by all of humanity, and represent some of the most painful chapters in the histories of Germany and Israel — they should not be invoked so casually.
By completely ignoring these international sentiments and equating Taiwan’s democracy with authoritarian regimes, Chu has severely damaged Taiwan’s image and infringed upon fundamental diplomatic and humanitarian norms.
The phrase “do not interfere in internal affairs” is the CCP’s standard response to international criticism, specifically when justifying its continued harassment of Taiwan, oppression of Xinjiang and Tibet, and suppression of Hong Kong. For Chu to echo the CCP’s rhetoric raises serious doubts about his values and position, and suggests an alignment with the Beijing’s overall narrative.
Last month, KMT supporter Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑) — suspected of using forged signatures on a recall petition against DPP Legislator Lee Kuen-cheng (李坤城) — arrived at the New Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office for questioning wearing a red armband bearing a swastika, carrying a copy of Hitler’s Mein Kampf and giving a Nazi salute. Despite the public outcry, Chu failed to condemn Sung’s actions. Now, he has exacerbated the issue and attracted an even stronger international backlash. Chu’s actions have demonstrated that he lacks the wisdom expected of a leader and the moral courage required to admit one’s own mistakes.
Telling foreign countries not to “interfere in internal affairs” is a weak excuse to avoid taking responsibility for failed party leadership. Even in a democracy, free speech is not a shield for arbitrarily spreading falsehoods, and parroting authoritarian rhetoric does not deflect legitimate external criticism.
Elliot Yao is a reviewer.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
China last week announced that it picked two Pakistani astronauts for its Tiangong space station mission, indicating the maturation of the two nations’ relationship from terrestrial infrastructure cooperation to extraterrestrial strategic domains. For Taiwan and India, the developments present an opportunity for democratic collaboration in space, particularly regarding dual-use technologies and the normative frameworks for outer space governance. Sino-Pakistani space cooperation dates back to the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, with a cooperative agreement between the Pakistani Space & Upper Atmosphere Research Commission, and the Chinese Ministry of Aerospace Industry. Space cooperation was integrated into the China-Pakistan
RSS