Following the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) loss in the presidential election, a strong voice has emerged attributing the loss to the “deep green” faction hijacking the DPP and urging the party to take the “middle road.”
What is this middle road? The political reality is the “pan-blue camp” represents China, whereas the “pan-green camp” represents Taiwan. In choosing between these two definitions of national identity, asking the DPP to take the middle road is tantamount to asking it to rally around the Chinese nationalism represented by the pan-blue camp.
This suggestion not only betrays the founding principles and ideals of the DPP, but it has also proven to be unsuccessful in practice. During the party primary and presidential election, DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) adopted an attitude of compromise and willingness to take the middle road — including emphasizing reconciliation and mutual survival and even defending a “constitutional one China.” The result was that the party lost by 2 million votes. Losing is not frightening in itself. What is frightening is when the loser does not even understand how the defeat came about.
Proponents of the middle road say that the relationship between Taiwan and China — and the DPP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — cannot be interpreted as antagonistic. But the fact is China has 1,400 missiles aimed at Taiwan. China has shown its determination to subsume Taiwan through its “Anti-Secession” Law and constantly seeks to diplomatically isolate Taiwan. If this is not the behavior of an enemy, how many more missiles and how much more oppression does Taiwan need to deal with?
The KMT is undeniably an enemy party of the DPP. Moreover, it is not a truly democratic party. If the KMT believes in democracy, it must return the public property it embezzled during the party-state era. Its continued possession of state property is the greatest testament to corruption in Taiwan. Furthermore, the party should actively remove the remnants of dictator Chiang Kai-shek’s (蔣介石) rule and deal with the family’s history of authoritarian rule to realize transitional justice. In addition, it must truly recognize Taiwan and remove the character “Chinese” from its title (中國國民黨) to become the Taiwanese Nationalist Party.
However, not only has the KMT refused to comply with these criteria, president-elect Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) even visited the Chiangs’ grave to pay his respects. Vice president-elect Vincent Siew (蕭萬長) and former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) have also visited China to scratch the back of Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). In doing so, the KMT has sold out Taiwan’s dignity and interests, while introducing the “one China” ideology into Taiwan.
The KMT also publicly considers the DPP its “main opponent” and intends to unite with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to curb Taiwanese independence. This has not only prevented Taiwan from achieving normal statehood, but also positions the DPP as a more antagonistic opponent than the CCP.
To those wishful thinkers within the DPP who advocate compromise and taking the middle road, not only has the KMT never reciprocated this interest, elections have also proven time and again that this route is not viable.
Any democratic party lacking in core values will eventually be eliminated by voters. If the DPP does not elect a non-factional leader who can uphold the party’s ideals, the party’s future will be bleak. As former secretary-general of the Presidential Office Chen Shih-meng (陳師孟) recently said: If the DPP were to emphasize the middle road at this point, then one should consider abandoning the DPP.
Cao Changqing is a Chinese writer based in the US.
Translated by Angela Hong
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