Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
He is the key to the KMT's future, for without superstar Ma, the KMT would become an empty shell, and even its legitimacy as a party might come into question. As a result, Ma had no choice but to contest the KMT chairmanship election.
Although not the sole determinant, Ma's Mainlander origins were a crucial factor contributing to his overwhelming victory over Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平). Given this "moral imperative," no one was able to hold back Ma's ambitions, and the triumvirate of Wang, outgoing KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰), and People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜), pales beside Ma's overwhelming presence. That's why Ma was able to garner more than 70 percent of the vote.
Ma's victory was simply a necessary step arranged by the party toward winning the 2008 presidential election. After all, the KMT's ultimate goal is to reclaim power. Such is their impatience that when the dust had barely settled from the election, the blue-camp was already setting up Ma as their 2008 candidate. This kind of myth-making is likely to prove to be Ma's Achilles heel.
There are two myths being built around Ma.
First, because the votes Ma garnered in the election were not all from Mainlanders -- since 70 percent is much larger than the proportion of Mainlanders in the party -- some say this indicates that Ma's appeal has crossed the ethnic divide. But has it? Let us consider the issue from Wang's perspective. Prior to the election, the Wang camp predicted that it could rely on the veterans' vote (180,000) and that of their families, accounting for a solid 500,000 votes.
After the election, Wang told American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Director Douglas Paal that the KMT only has slightly more than 700,000 members, considerably less that the 1.04 million it had previously claimed. He said Ma's votes came primarily from Mainlanders and that members with a localization bent had either failed to vote or left the party. This suggestion echoes former president Lee Teng-hui's (李登輝) belief that Wang's pro-China stance caused many of his supporters to pull back.
In fact, the KMT keeps track of voter information and could break the figures down by ethnic group. But Ma would not want to do this, and if he did, he certainly would not make the information public. Fortunately, we can draw our information from other sources, and anecdotal and media evidence suggests that Mainlanders came out to vote in force. Could Ma have won without this source of support?
The other myth is that support for Ma has crossed the Chuoshui River, the nominal line separating northern Taiwan from the south. This suggests that Ma not only had an overwhelming victory in the north, in places such as Taipei City, Taipei County and Taoyuan County, but also led by a landslide (more than 80 percent) in the south.
Kaohsiung County's Mainlander strongholds, such as Fengshan (
Ma's supporters do not wish to look at the facts. Instead, they are intent on building a mythic web around him, showering him with glory and making an early start on his campaign for the 2008 election.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator based in Taipei.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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