In a time of political hunger strikes, student protests and fiscal madness in the guise of universal consumer vouchers, news must be spectacular to get airplay. One story that received very little this week was an item on the restructuring of the Central Standing Committee of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
In a throwback to closer party-state ties, the KMT has announced that its highest decision-making body will now include seats for “five top Cabinet members.” The reason given for this change — and said with a straight face — was to “enhance cooperation” between the party and the government.
In an unstable system such as Taiwan’s, which juggles presidential, executive and legislative authority and which is prone to predatory behavior, the move represents party encroachment on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) authority over the Cabinet, the increasing influence of KMT headquarters and Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) and a blow to Ma’s agenda to make the Central Standing Committee more accountable to grassroots members.
The dispatching of former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) to the APEC leaders’ meeting in Lima, Peru, is another example of party headquarters muscling in on the affairs of the executive. Sadly for Ma, and hilariously for Lien, the Chinese have drawn a line at giving any more face to its friends in Taiwan by refusing the delegation access to an informal meeting of foreign ministers and pedantically correcting a journalist’s use of “President Ma.”
It is instructive that Taiwan’s officials should be treated this way while in a position of relative strength vis a vis China. The problem is that in tolerating this, the KMT administration loses control of its credibility as a national government.
The KMT cannot be trusted to defend even basic symbols of nationhood such as the flag and the anthem. Ma, for one, warmed up as Taipei mayor by agreeing to prohibit the display of Republic of China imagery at international sports events in the city. He has fine-tuned this skill to now include rationalization of behavior by security forces attacking people carrying national symbols.
As cumbersome and risible as the DPP can be, the party has an agenda that is consistent with the enduring global environment of nation-states. Its aspirations are much closer to what is in the interests of all Taiwanese — regardless of political color — even if its leaders at times seem to have no idea why.
The KMT’s actions this week again suggest that it will not change its philosophy of power and will not respect the separation of powers — be they legislative, executive, judicial, examination, oversight or partisan political organizations. And while the KMT retains a preference for strongman structures, it has a weak man as president. Yet the KMT cannot possibly run the state as a triumvirate of Ma, Wu and Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平) because each considers himself the primary force for the party.
Like the Chinese Communist Party, all that is left for the KMT is its ability to run a tight fiscal ship. When that is gone, the KMT will have neither the aptitude nor the support to resort to violence to prevent DPP presidential or legislative election victories. If it tries to do so, its only supporter would be Beijing. The fundamental anti-Americanism of the KMT would become part of its daily armor as the US realizes, all too late, that not only is the KMT a “sonofabitch,” but also that it was never theirs to begin with.
Isolated by civilized nations and smarting from more humiliation, the KMT would turn to China — and die.
Suicide is the KMT’s fate. The question is which road it will take and whether it will have the tactical sense to give birth to a new political movement that gives Taiwanese a genuine political choice.
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