It has only been a few days since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) promised it would be humble and respect its opponents in the legislature, yet there we were on Thursday with the party's presidential candidate, Ma Ying-jeou (
KMT supporters claim that the campaign team for Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Yu Tien (
Ma told the KMT candidate, Chu Chun-hsiao (
Another curious thing is how Ma thinks that targeting Yu, a popular ethnic Taiwanese singer and actor, would help his image and achieve "reconciliation" with the party's foes. Given that Yu's electorate was one of only two that the DPP won in northern Taiwan, Ma's hardline approach can hardly impress neutral voters looking for a little less gratuitous conflict in politics.
But the strangest thing about this saga is that it comes just after Ma released his wishy-washy "three noes" policy on cross-strait affairs.
The Ma that warned of revenge in Sanchong might have been expected to promise "No compromises, no indignities and no nonsense" in dealing with Beijing. Instead, he promised no move toward unification, no move toward independence and no war.
This is, quite literally, a policy of inaction, and up to eight years of it. The "status quo" so beloved by the US State Department has become Ma's campaign hook, even if it makes no sense whatsoever in strategic terms.
"No war" is an odd thing to sign up to. Clearly, it is not in Taiwan's interests to launch an unprovoked attack on China. It is far more likely that China would be the one to start a war. Therefore Ma must want voters to believe that he, and only he, can stop a war if the Chinese start fueling their missiles.
Ma needs to explain what he would do if China continues lining its coast with weaponry. In other words, he needs to reassure voters that he is prepared to make difficult decisions if the balance of power in Beijing one day tilts to its most militant officials.
The idea that China would be willing to wait four or even eight years before any substantial move is made toward unification is inconsistent with both its rhetoric and its "Anti-Secession" Law, especially with the chance that a reanimated DPP might claim the presidency after that time.
The whole scenario is, quite simply, ridiculous. If the DPP is smart, it will go after these pie-in-the-sky promises, which seem to take no account of the efforts the military makes to protect this country.
A source in the Taiwanese military recently told Defense News of fears that KMT control of the executive would hamper the military's attempts to acquire appropriate weapons and that kickback culture would be reinvigorated as politicians look to make hay out of expensive but ineffective procurements.
Ma might be better off spending his campaign trying to convince voters that he is able to defend the professionalism of the military from such parasites -- not play silly media games sprouting macho language that borders on contempt of court.
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