No wonder some people are beginning to feel fed up with this presidential election. Just the questions of whether to hold televised debates between the presidential candidates and who is to blame for the inability to hold such debates thus far are enough to generate a real war of words between the pan-green and pan-blue camps.
After the Lunar New Year, Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
However, Ma's new-found enthusiasm evidently took not only the enemy -- the pan-green camp -- by surprise, but also people on his own side, which in turn demonstrates a lack of coordination and rapport in the pan-blue campaign team.
Ma rarely speaks in such harsh tones. As if they were hesitating over Ma's new demeanor, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
This phenomenon is even more clearly demonstrated in the current discussions about televised debates. Signs indicate that Ma may not win much appreciation from his own camp for initiating the proposal for televised debates.
It is not hard to imagine that Lien, who is not exactly known as a charismatic and eloquent man, would not enjoy the upper hand in live televised debates. So, if he has reservations about such debates, it is entirely understandable.
According to Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) campaign spokesman Wu Nei-jen (
The debate was never held.
This time around, Lien's campaign team acted as if they were clueless about Ma's proposal for the debates. Friday, when asked about the debates, KMT legislative speaker and pan-blue presidential campaign director Wang Jin-pyng (
As for Lien, his sole response on Friday was a brisk "[I] welcome [it]."
The awkwardness of the situation is further highlighted by the discussions over debate topics. Ma asked for debates on the issue of the legality of the national referendum, which was of course welcomed by the ruling DPP, since the national referendum is the core of its campaign platform. Yet, either unwilling to follow Ma's lead or thinking Lien wouldn't win too many brownie points on this issue, other voices from within the pan-blue camp began to say the first round of debates should be about domestic and economic issues.
The truth of the matter is Lien probably won't enjoy an advantage in a debate over such issues either, not with the rising stock market, declining unemployment rate and improving economy.
Perhaps detecting the reservations of the pan-blue camp about the debates, the DPP is pressing hard to hold the debates as soon as possible -- within 10 days. However, the pan-blue camp is again stalling, saying that a survey should be conducted to help the two sides decide the topics for debates and that the debates should not be held until at least 20 days after the DPP has released a white paper on the referendum issue.
It is to be sincerely hoped that this time around the debates can take place.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS