When it comes to Taiwanese elections, debate on independence and unification dominates. Although Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
However, the fact remains that whoever wants to win the next presidential election must prove that he is a capable leader without being captured, branded and held hostage by individual interest groups, especially the old guard within his party.
Recent inconsistencies between Ma's camp, former KMT chairman Lien Chan (
After Lien issued a "warning" statement to Ma's camp to "refrain from sacrificing its ideals for the sake of electoral victory," Ma labeled the inconsistency in the CSC report an "incident" and blamed it on his staff. The episode should not be seen simply as an accident but a manifestation of mistrust between Ma and Lien.
If it were simply a trivial mistake as Ma claims, why would Lien express such deep concern and strong anger about it without talking to Ma in advance?
Born in Hong Kong and trained in the KMT's hierarchical party structure, Ma was indoctrinated in the dogma of "ultimate unification" with China. However, because the phenomenon of "Taiwan-centered consciousness" has been strengthening in recent years, Ma has been trying to play the "Taiwan card" ever since he unveiled his campaign.
Ma's "long stay" bicycle tour around Taiwan was designed for the candidate to demonstrate love for Taiwan in the hope of scooping up the "light green" vote from the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
Ma further sought to downplay the unification fantasy while consolidating support from the pro-unification camp by introducing the theory of "connecting Taiwan with China" and incorporating "Taiwan" wording into the KMT's party charter, as well as saying the "Republic of China is Taiwan."
There is no doubt that Ma has been sitting on the fence on the independence-unification issue. In response to the DPP referendum on using the name "Taiwan" to join the UN, Ma decided to offer an alternative referendum using the name "the Republic of China" to return to the United Nations and whatever title is most appropriate for joining other bodies. But the truth is Ma and the KMT have not shown strong determination or concrete action to push their own referendum forward.
This time though, Ma opted to put aside the controversial "1992 consensus" -- which turned out to be nothing but a phrase invented by KMT former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) -- and obscure the unification-independence dichotomy. However, it seems he has crossed the "red line" set by the KMT old guard and was slapped in the face by Lien.
The internal political storm proves that Ma has never respected the KMT elders and has been insisting on running his own campaign.
But if Ma can resist the pressure from the KMT old guard, at least he can prove he stands for Taiwan's best interests. Regretfully, Ma's repeated vacillation on the issue proves he is willing to sacrifice his beliefs for electoral purposes.
Most importantly, what are the voters supposed to do if they hand over the country to Ma and he just changes his mind whenever he is under pressure? Can the Taiwanese people trust a presidential candidate who is more of a political opportunist than a responsible and solid leader to defend the country's sovereignty?
The bottom line is this: The next president of Taiwan must uphold the majority public opinion when it comes to national sovereignty and relations with China. The 23 million Taiwanese must have the final say on their future through a peaceful and democratic mechanism such as a national referendum.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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