President Chen Shui-bian's (
But the question is: Has the pan-blue camp really grasped the crux of the problem? Evidently not. Lien and Soong have responded to their defeat by stirring up protest by their supporters, claiming that the election was unfair and invalid. This appears on the surface to be an attempt to overturn the results of the election, but it would do not to be deceived. The real motive for the protest is to transfer responsibility for the defeat away from Lien and Soong, riding on the wave of an emotional crowd. To put it another way, the pair's stirring up of the masses is designed to ensure their survival as leaders of the pan-blue camp.
It is equally understandable how difficult the defeat was to accept given the miniscule margin of only 0.228 percentage points. But did Lien and Soong really lose by only 29,518 votes? Again, this is far from the case. They went from collectively having 60 percent of the vote in the 2000 elections to a situation where, four years down the road, they are neck and neck with the pan-green camp. Shouldn't Lien and Soong shoulder the blame for this? The two men seem to be blaming the Democratic Progressive Party and Chen for the situation, bearing none of the responsibility for themselves.
This is hardly an isolated case as far as Lien is concerned. Consider his record. Following the 2000 election defeat he placed then-KMT chairman Lee Teng-hui (
Now we have seen the loosening of the KMT's hold on their domain. For a leader to react in this way, attempting to annul the election and hide behind his supporters, seems to be resorting to desperate measures.
Despite Lien's ability to wield the loyalty of his supporters to his own advantage like this, politics is both unforgiving and brutal. His much heralded "second transition of power" has proved to be nothing but pie in the sky, but there may be worse to come.
If the pan-blues lose seats in the year-end legislative elections, exacerbating their loss of power, this will be bad news not just for Lien but for the KMT and the PFP. Could it be that there is really an invisible hand acting behind the scenes of Taiwanese history?
Chin Heng-wei is the editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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