What is this new penchant of political leaders to make promises so florid that they carry with them a self-destruct mechanism if things go astray?
Premier Su Tseng-chang (
If Su is sincere about reducing crime, he has done himself no favors by committing himself to a result that relies on complex statistical analyses -- the trashing of which has become a pan-blue-camp specialty, regardless of the strength of the evidence -- as well as the public's perception via opinion polls that crime is falling. Worse, this perception is more a product of media manipulation and hyperbole than it is of personal experience of crime and social trends.
Tying the leadership of a Cabinet and the morale of its ministers to this standard is unnecessary -- and obstructive. Instead of putting pressure on Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Su's backers in the party must be hoping against hope that Minister of the Interior Lee Yi-yang (
Last year's local government elections were in part a test of the new party chairmen. Ma cleverly promised to step down if the pan-blue camp did not secure a certain number of city and county electorates. Ma was clever because the number he chose was modest under the circumstances. Su almost immediately followed with the same promise, brandishing a number so unrealistic that he was more or less forced to start considering his next career move there and then.
But at the time, it seemed that Su could step down as chairman of the DPP with honor. He simply did not have the time to fix the mess that he inherited, but his resignation gave the party a brief shot of dignity that someone could accept responsibility and take a fall.
Now Su has repeated this tactic. But this time he doesn't represent a party; he heads the Executive Yuan. It is a radical move at a time that the Cabinet requires strength, solidarity and confidence after years of instability and lack of momentum. For the sake of the government, Su would be better advised to never give up, never give in, never resign until all other options have been exhausted. Now that Su has floated the prospect of resignation after the shortest time possible in the job, DPP supporters who have seen their premiers come and go must be starting to get that sinking feeling again.
Meanwhile, the Mainlander-dominated criminal network Bamboo Union and other pro-KMT thugs must be rubbing their hands with barely suppressed glee. If Su is Ma's only credible challenger for the presidency, then here's an open invitation for them from Su himself to contribute to his possible removal from office by markedly increasing their criminal activity. Pro-DPP criminals, for their part, are hardly likely to wind back their operations and place limits on their livelihoods to indulge a politician's risky strategy.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and