Although former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良) is the least likely candidate to win the party’s presidential nomination, he was the one who received the most attention when the three candidates recently presented their campaign platforms. Hsu’s participation in the primary will be a powerful catalyst to increase the pressure on the party’s other presidential hopefuls, Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) and Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), to listen to and incorporate the many competing ideas that are being debated within the party.
On the final day of registration for the party primary, Hsu borrowed the money to pay the NT$5 million (US$172,000) registration fee and instantly interjected a new variable to the competition between Su and Tsai. Hsu said he entered so he too could have the chance to express himself because he feels he has something important to add to the discussion.
Hsu’s political career has experienced many ups and downs and his participation in the nation’s political reform is legendary. He started out as a star in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), but was later branded a traitor. He was an important leader of the dangwai — outside the party — movement and the Formosa magazine, after which he was forced out of Taiwan and blacklisted by the government.
In his first stint as chairman of the DPP in 1992 and 1993, he struck a deal with then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) that had a great impact on the constitutional amendments introducing direct presidential elections. He belongs to the DPP camp favoring deeper engagement with China and has advocated a “bravely go west” policy, setting off a debate within the party. In the end, his dream of becoming president caused him to leave the DPP, and now that dream has brought him back again.
Although Hsu is an incurable optimist who wants to grab his last opportunity to fulfill his dream of becoming president, he must know that his chances of winning the DPP’s nomination are slim, not to mention his odds of beating incumbent President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九). Hsu is the consummate opportunist always looking to stir things up. The NT$5 million registration fee bought him great political advertising — not only has he now told the world that Hsu Hsin-liang is still around, he has highlighted the vibrancy of the democratic atmosphere in the DPP which allows the party to tolerate differing opinions and showed that the DPP is not afraid of consolidating its leadership by letting an incumbent and two former party leaders run for the party’s presidential nomination.
Hsu’s candidacy not only pressures Su and Tsai, it also impacts on Ma. Compared with the vibrancy of the DPP primary, the KMT appears to be as lively as a bunch of stiffs. Although Ma’s popularity has dropped to just more than 30 percent — now consisting only of hardened pan-blue supporters — no one dares stand up and challenge him by disagreeing with his one-sided pro-China policies, his economic policies that are widening the wealth gap, his nuclear energy and industrial policies that harm the nation’s natural environment, the way he always apologizes for mistakes after the fact instead of managing things properly beforehand, or by saying that Ma lacks the necessary executive skills.
We have seen how Legislative Speaker Wang Jyn-ping (王金平) was accused of connections to organized crime when he challenged Ma’s candidacy for the party chairmanship and how he remains under pressure today. The KMT essentially remains the -Leninist-style revolutionary party from 80 years ago.
Hsu will almost certainly not be able to build enough momentum to win the nomination, but at least someone like him exists in the DPP and the party has the democratic maturity to tolerate his presence and voice. No such person exists in the KMT, nor does it have the democratic tolerance to allow someone like Hsu to enter the debate.
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
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS