As if things are not already chaotic enough in the run- up to the presidential election, the pan-blues have started talking about the danger of riots by angry mobs over the result of the election and even the possibility of President Chen Shui-bian (
On Wednesday, People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (
In response, the Executive Yuan made a U-turn, agreeing to the proposal about separating the voting for the presidential election and the referendum. Since this was the proposal endorsed and supported by the pan-blues, the move was obviously intended to end disputes over how the election should be administered and wild accusations about ulterior motives on the part of the Cabinet. Contrary to such groundless accusations, the last thing that the government and the ruling party want is a riot or a state of emergency.
It is ironic that the Soong and members of the pan-blues should be the ones warning about the possibility of a riot and the imposition of martial law. After all, in the past two presidential elections, the only riot that took place was staged in 2000 by KMT members who supported Soong -- who had run as an independent after he left the KMT because it had nominated Lien Chan (
While it is the responsibility of the leaders and candidates of both camps to ask their supporters to show self-restraint before an election takes place, with the KMT's record it is imperative for pan-blue leaders to call on their supporters to show sportsmanship and respect for democracy, and not repeat their previous mistakes. However, the statements of Soong and other pan-blue camp members seem designed to accomplish precisely the opposite -- to inflame public sentiment through wild conspiracy theories and instill fear about the possibility of a state of emergency and martial law being declared. Such things are nothing to laugh at: people have vivid memories of the terror of the KMT's martial law era.
In contrast, the pan-greens, including Minister of the Interior Yu Cheng-hsien (
However, having gone through two presidential elections, one is inclined to believe that the people of Taiwan have enough maturity to respect the outcome of the election -- regardless of who wins.
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