Ever since Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) was nominated as the party’s presidential candidate, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has been challenging her on cross-strait issues. However, the KMT should realize that cross-strait policy might not be that important and focusing on it might not take the party anywhere.
Since Tsai declared that her cross-strait policy would be to maintain the “status quo” and push for cross-strait exchanges on the condition of an equal footing, KMT politicians — including President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) and presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) — have been pressing her to elaborate on what she means by “maintaining the status quo,” while calling on her to recognize the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Although KMT lawmakers believe that the issue of cross-strait relations will play a key role in January’s presidential and legislative elections, it is really not that important for Taiwanese voters.
According to the results of an opinion poll conducted by the Taiwan Brain Trust and released on Wednesday, only 5.9 percent of respondents said that cross-strait relations are something the next president should prioritize.
So what do voters want the next government to focus on? As many as 62.9 percent of respondents said they wanted an emphasis on economic development, 12.4 percent said government efficiency should be improved, and 8.8 percent said social fairness and justice should be a priority. The issue of cross-strait relations was identified as the fourth-most important issue.
Most Taiwanese know that the cross-strait “status quo” might not change any time soon and there are more pressing issues — such as low salaries, rising living costs, high property prices, food safety and inefficient government — that they would rather see resolved as soon as possible.
The majority of Taiwanese want the nation to become independent, yet they are concerned that a formal declaration of independence might provoke a Chinese invasion. Therefore, at the moment, they would rather Taiwan remain a de facto nation.
A similar pattern can be seen in various opinion polls. No matter which organization conducts the poll, the option of “maintaining the status quo” always receives the most support. However, when the “maintaining the status quo” option is taken out and respondents are asked to choose between “Taiwanese independence” and “unification with China,” the majority of respondents go for “Taiwanese independence” instead.
The Taiwan Brain Trust poll also garnered similar results: While 61.4 percent of respondents said that Taiwan should become an independent nation, only 12.3 percent supported unification with China. Also, 87 percent of respondents identified themselves as “Taiwanese,” while only 6.1 percent considered themselves “Chinese.”
This is perhaps why Tsai declared that she would strive to maintain the cross-strait “status quo,” and her declaration has won the support of more than 50 percent of respondents in every opinion poll conducted since.
As the DPP advocates Taiwan’s de jure independence, some people might fear that voting for the DPP could provoke a Chinese invasion. However, now that Tsai has promised to maintain the “status quo,” people should have nothing to worry about.
On the other hand, the KMT might exacerbate people’s fears if it keeps promoting closer ties with Beijing.
If the KMT is smart, it would stop talking about cross-strait relations and focus on domestic issues.
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