So it’s official. President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), who vowed several times prior to the presidential election that he would not concurrently serve as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman, announced yesterday that he will run for KMT chairman next month. He is likely to be the only candidate.
Ma said the decision was prompted by his “sense of responsibility” for the nation’s competitiveness and government performance. But Ma’s claim that he can properly manage state and party affairs inspires nothing but skepticism given that his performance as president has come under heavy and deserved criticism from foes and erstwhile friends.
Ma’s latest promise of party reform rings hollow. Given his record as KMT chairman when the party was in opposition and the open hostility toward him in sections of the KMT, little good can be expected to come of it, even if his hand will be strengthened. On almost every occasion that Ma has had the chance to choose between reformers and hardliners in his party, political considerations have pushed him into the laps of the latter.
In 2006, when Ma was party chairman, the KMT toughened its “black gold” exclusion clause so that party members indicted on suspicion of a crime would have their party membership suspended. The KMT was applauded for making the change, resulting in a party disciplinary regime tougher than that of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which suspends members only if a guilty verdict is confirmed on appeal.
The applause didn’t last long. Shortly after Ma was indicted for corruption, the party bent its rules so that Ma could remain its presidential candidate even if he were found guilty of corruption in a first trial. So much for propriety.
The attractiveness of the chairmanship this time around stems from the KMT-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) communication platform established by former KMT chairman Lien Chan (連戰) in 2005. This platform allowed Lien and KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung (吳伯雄) many opportunities to travel to China, meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and collaborate with the CCP on how to bring the two sides closer together.
Ma can increase the credibility of his agenda of detente in the eyes of his supporters at home and interested governments by taking control of this process and maneuvering to meet with Hu, thus strengthening the illusion of cross-strait stability and leaving his mark in history — or so he would think.
Ma’s domestic agenda may turn out to be easier to implement through greater influence over party nominations — and, perhaps, neutralizing his more outspoken critics within the KMT. But it remains to be seen what Ma will be able to deliver.
In addition, the renewed narrowing between national and KMT interests makes it everyone’s business to keep Ma and his party under scrutiny. Sadly, Ma’s record of disingenuousness and list of abandoned pledges makes this doubly necessary.
On several occasions, Ma has used the saying “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Unless Ma has superhuman powers and is able to withstand the terrible temptations of increased authority, Taiwanese can expect to see Ma’s ruthless side emerge as his impatience grows with opponents in the KMT and outside it. For a man whose most stable characteristic is his ideological devotion to a unified China, this promises more, not less, conflict at home.
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS