Next Wednesday marks the one year anniversary of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou's (
While the KMT's willingness to explain how it has managed its stolen assets is to be applauded, it is hoped that this new-found interest in transparency will not turn into a "bait and switch" game, with the emphasis on finding fault with former president Lee Teng-hui (
In 2004, former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
Within one year of Ma's chairmanship, half a dozen key pieces of real estate have been auctioned off: the Institute of Policy Research and Development, the Chunghua Open Hospital, three KMT-owned media outlets and the party's old headquarters on Zhongshan South Road.
These asset sales reaped billions of dollars, and totally ignored the question of how they came to be in the KMT's hands. Where did all the money go, and how does the party continue to plead poverty in the face of such huge injections of capital?
According to the KMT's own twisted logic, most of the assets were obtained "legally," so it is free to do whatever it likes with them. But what was legal during the authoritarian era -- particularly during the height of KMT suppression in the 1950s -- and what is legal in today's democracy is radically different. Talking about "legally obtained" assets during the White Terror period just doesn't make any sense, when the KMT was the ultimate source of authoritarian rule.
Ma talks about "integrity" and "reform" often, and has portrayed himself as above the corrupted politics of the administration of President Chen Shui-bian (
The KMT amassed a vast empire of banks, investment companies, petrochemical firms and media outlets during its autocratic rule, making it the richest political party in the world at one point. There are few political institutions quite like it in free market economies anywhere on the planet.
Time and again, the stolen assets have been the subject of criticism from the party's political opponents during elections. If the party had faith in the nation's democracy, it would give the assets back to the people to eradicate this potent source of electoral discontent.
Ma has won considerable support for his "clean-cut" image. Next Wednesday provides another opportunity for him to live up to his reputation and prove to the public that the KMT, under his leadership, is actively dealing with the nation's assets that are currently in his hands. The people can only hope the chairman will do the right thing.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS