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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS