If former American Institute in Taiwan chairman Nat Bellocchi is to be believed, the push to oust President Chen Shui-bian (
If this is the case, the charade is not working. If anything, forces in the KMT are now using the maverick campaign to undermine Ma, accusing him of being a pushover. Presumably, these KMT hardliners would prefer Ma lead an armed assault on the Presidential Office with a few thousand stormtroopers in tow, or at least join the sit-in and pout for a few hours like former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
Yesterday's developments offer Ma and his supporters a reminder that all is not well within their party, and that Ma's increasingly vocal enemies in the pan-blue camp are looking for opportunities to undermine his authority -- and eventually prevent him from being the KMT's presidential candidate.
When Ma was elected KMT chairman -- against the expectations of most media commentators and despite fervent opposition from the party's inner circle -- there was a sense among grassroots supporters that the party could be energized and taken in a new direction, if not one entirely free of thuggery and contempt for democratic principles.
This was based on Ma's history of cultivating a reasonably clean persona -- and exercising authority in this manner -- despite being surrounded by the filthiest of the filthy.
The problem is, the forces that would prefer the KMT return to its roots have decided that Ma is not their man, and they are regrouping. If he is to withstand these attacks from within, Ma is going to have to demonstrate that he can stand up for himself in ways other than weakly parroting the language of blue-camp firebrands.
Ma claims that he has "hardened up." Unfortunately, this is not reflected in Ma taking his own line and sticking to it, but in taking a harder line to disarm blue-camp extremists. This is not political strength, nor is it pragmatism; it is flat-footed, wishy-washy and manipulable behavior.
The average blue-camp voter does not endorse public disorder. It would therefore benefit Ma and the nation's morale if he spoke more for the broad majority of people that gave him his chance to be president and less for the rabble rousers within his party and without.
Ma's defense of his role as keeper of the peace in Taipei against the bleatings of KMT city councilors -- who would have anti-Chen protesters break the law and not be accountable -- is proof that Ma has the ability to stare down miscreants in his party. Unfortunately, he so often seems unable to stare down miscreants with any power. That is why he capitulated so readily when People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Reforming the KMT was always going to involve some bloodletting, but now it seems that Ma will have a serious struggle on his hands to achieve this. If Ma cannot control his troops, the DPP will be able to ask: "Who will really have power in a KMT government and can they be trusted?"
The skeletons in the KMT's closet are too many and too odious for the pan-green camp not to be able to exploit this angle, despite its complacency and ham-fisted politicking of late, and despite growing alienation among voters. If things continue in this direction, the DPP will be thrown a lifeline for an election that it should never have been able to win.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS