Another issue has been added to the long list of things that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) cannot agree on -- whether to pick up their referendum ballots.
On Tuesday, PFP Chairman James Soong (
No law will be broken if a person does not vote in the referendum, but it is a civic duty and a precious opportunity to ensure that the people's voice can be heard.
Politicians and government officials who oppose this, such as Soong and PFP lawmakers who plan to ape their leader, set very bad examples for a young democracy.
As for Lien, Ma and other KMT members who are playing hard-to-get on the issue, well, they are just laughable. But this is no joke. It should be a matter of pride and joy for every citizen that this country is about to reach a democratic milestone with the holding of this referendum. Not only are Lien and Ma in fact indefensibly opposed to the referendum, they dare not admit to this for fear of incurring public scorn.
It is hard to respect people who can be so evasive, so cowardly -- yet this is merely another example of the KMT's dispiriting ambiguity on critical matters of principle, another example of which was its refusal to participate in referendum debates with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
The KMT apparently feels it has much to resent over this referendum, and some members, particularly Ma, have not been shy in courting the media in the past, so why not use the debates to explain their reasons for opposing it? At least they would earn some respect that way.
Instead, pro-blue-camp talk-show hosts, such as Li Ao (
Ma tried to explain that the KMT's refusal to take part in the debates was not an attack on referendums per se, just the March 20 referendum.
But that still does not explain why the KMT is unwilling to join the debates. Jaw, for his part, is also opposed to the upcoming referendum, but he's almost salivating at the prospect of taking on the DPP.
The fundamental reason for the KMT equivocating on the referendum appears to be concern about being labeled "anti-democratic" and "anti-referendum." This wishy-washy, ambiguous behavior is nothing new. In fact, the pan-blue camp has behaved this way with respect to other major policy issues, especially sovereignty -- witness Lien's opening statement in last Saturday's debate proposing to put sovereignty issues aside.
In the end, however, there is only one question that matters: Can Lien Chan be entrusted with the future of a country whose very democratic processes he detests?
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS