The troubles President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has experienced since he named his Control and Examination Yuan nominees has been interesting in that they not only have shown how far Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators are willing to go to defy their president, but also for revealing the double standards that permeate the pan-blue camp.
During the previous government’s tenure, pan-blue figures and the pro-unification media lined up to criticize what it called the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) “political appointments,” criticizing former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) for using state-run company chairmanships and overseas representative positions to reward friends and loyal party figures.
As an editorial in the Chinese-language China Times put it on April 29, “The Chen Shui-bian regime filled government posts based on political considerations, and forced the entire nation to suffer the consequences.”
But since the KMT came back to power on May 20, that holier-than-thou opposition to political horse-trading seems to have evaporated.
This was apparent even before the KMT assumed office, as with the announcement in late April that former Taiwan Solidarity Union legislator Lai Shin-yuan (賴幸媛) would be appointed Mainland Affairs Council chairwoman. KMT caucus acting secretary-general Hsieh Kuo-liang (謝國樑) was quick to remind Ma that “the KMT is full of talented people” and that “they did their best to campaign for the KMT during legislative and presidential elections.”
Similar reminders were issued again last month during the diplomatic spat with Japan over the Diaoyutais (釣魚台), which led to the resignation of the pro-independence representative to Japan, Koh Se-kai (�?�). The calls to replace DPP appointees with the KMT faithful were vocal and unabashed.
The rejection on Friday of most of the pan-green-friendly candidates selected by Ma for the Control Yuan also seemed to have been carried out in disgust at Ma’s failure to reward former People First Party (PFP) members who lost their legislative seats with a suitable sinecure. In fact, several former PFP members were reportedly upset that Ma had failed to nominate PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) as Control Yuan president.
The irony of appointing Soong — a convicted tax evader who showed nothing but contempt for the same body when summoned to explain his finances ahead of the 2000 presidential election — as president of the Control Yuan seems to have been lost on some of our more hardcore pan-blue colleagues.
Giving charge of the government body tasked with fighting corruption among elected officials and senior civil servants to someone who has enormous question marks hanging over his integrity would be lunacy.
To his credit, Ma resisted the temptation to “reward” such people in the first round of nominees, but how he reacts to the rejection of his candidates and who he nominates to fill the still-empty positions will say a lot about how he intends to rule and whether he has the backbone to stand up to those in the KMT who openly advocate cronyism.
Throughout his political career, Ma has advocated the need for integrity and clean government. The next few weeks will prove whether he has the wherewithal to stick to his guns.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS