Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls.
That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed no intention of doing any of these. Instead, he called on President William Lai (賴清德) to apologize and reflect on his own culpability in the campaign, despite Lai supporting it from a distance rather than initiating it. During his speech, Chu said that voters in the recall districts had chosen “stability” and wanted the government to “do its job properly.”
Stability is indeed a desirable quality in politics. It would have been interesting for Chu to address the legislative chaos that he has overseen as leader of the opposition since February of last year. After all, it was this chaos and controversy that sparked the unprecedented recall drive. Voters cannot count on stability being his mantra going forward.
We would also have liked to hear more from Chu about how the government was supposed to “do its job properly” when his party has consistently held back the central government’s budget, redirecting funds to KMT-led local governments and blocking nearly every initiative the Lai administration has attempted to pass.
An apology would have been warranted for the chaos he has been responsible for.
Chu thanked the voters in Saturday’s recall vote for how they had shown their wisdom and demonstrated the maturity of Taiwan’s democracy, uniting to “protect democracy and safeguard Taiwan.”
He seems to have disregarded the opinions of tens of thousands of voters who voted “yes” to the recalls. Perhaps he considers them unwise or believes they were complicit in failing to protect democracy or safeguard Taiwan by voting against KMT legislators. It is easier to blame political rivals and ignore the anger that has fueled the electorate’s discontent.
He should apologize to the voters whose opinions he willfully disregards.
The man who is notorious for championing unity in the run-up to elections appears to have misunderstood the concept. He is not advocating for unity within the country; he is calling for a united front against those who disagree with him.
Chu also thanked the thousands of volunteers and party workers who campaigned for the “no” vote. However, there was no mention of those among them who are now under investigation or in detention for irregularities and alleged illegal actions, such as collecting signatures in Chu’s ill-fated recall drives against DPP legislators.
That is another apology he has yet to make.
Chu has failed to acknowledge that while the recalls in blue-leaning districts fell short at the final hurdle, the recall motions in green-leaning districts never even got off the ground. Despite his calls for unity, his actions are only deepening political divisions, compounded by his refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of the concerns that fueled them. Not only has there been no apology, but there has also been no indication that he even recognizes one is necessary.
KMT sources announced on Saturday that Chu would reveal today the format and timetable for the KMT chairmanship election. This could be an opportunity for him to pass the party baton, potentially to Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕).
It would be best for Chu to step down, but do not expect an apology for the way he has handled himself.
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS