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.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS