The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Wednesday unanimously passed a proposal to have outgoing chairman Lien Chan (連戰) serve as the party's honorary chairman after he steps down next month. Accepting the title specifically created for him, Lien said that he would be a "lifetime volunteer" for the party.
To simplify matters, the KMT has so far not considered amending its regulations and formalizing the post. In other words, the title of honorary chairman has been presented to Lien and Lien alone -- no succeeding chairmen are likely to enjoy such an esteemed designation.
But is Lien really fit for the title? And does the KMT really need to have an honorary chairman? In all of its history, the KMT has only had five chairmen: Sun Yat-sen (
Has Lien, a two-time presidential election loser, really outperformed his predecessors? The Chinese Communist Party, despite all of its dictatorial trappings and inclinations, did not have a special title created for paramount leader Deng Xiaoping (
The very fact that the title had to be made up suggests the KMT has ignored the grassroots voters who comprehensively rejected Lien's favored candidate and thus is yet to ditch its feudalist thinking -- observe the new generation of leaders scratching their heads over what to do with their vain predecessors. Worse, the creation of an honorary position may affect future party operations.
After Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
But let's not forget Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-ping (
Given that Lien will serve as the president of a KMT-linked think tank in addition to being honorary chairman, the question needs to be asked: Will he continue to pull the strings?
Since cross-strait affairs will probably be one of the central concerns of Lien's think tank, who now will have the last word on cross-strait policy?
"It's better to quit while you're ahead," as they say. Lien doesn't believe in this old slice of wisdom, and so he is not likely to reconsider accepting the honorary chairman's post. Having finally presided over something the KMT can be proud of -- a genuinely democratic party election -- Lien could have taken a graceful bow and left the stage.
Instead, he is likely to make himself an even bigger laughingstock as the KMT struggles to transform itself into a genuinely democratic party of the present.
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