What ever sympathy the moderates and pan-green supporters may have felt for the campaign of former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-Teh (
From the outset, the plan made people question whether Shih and his gang had gone too far and were flirting with extremism.
If Shih had any sense left, he would stop threatening to launch a strike. Such talk will only distance a large number of people who -- for a variety of different reasons -- feel highly disappointed with Chen but would choose to put up with him for a little longer over taking the country down the path of self-destruction.
When talk of a general strike began to surface, six industrial groups, including the Chinese National Federation of Industry and the Taiwan Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers' Association, immediately called on Shih and his followers to refrain from pursuing the idea.
The disapproval of the business sector for this course of action is clear. Whatever complaints business may have against Chen for the current state of the economy, they dislike even more any talk of a strike. After all, Taiwan has never had a general strike. Launching one would set a precedent that Taiwan's business sector does not want to see.
If Shih persists down this path, most pan-blue politicians will be forced to distance themselves from his cause. Politicians have future elections to think about. While the newly assembled legion of A-bian haters is probably enough to get Shih elected to whatever post he chooses -- if, that is, he decides to return to politics -- this throng is not large enough to put key pan-blue politicians into office.
They have to worry about how people in other parts of society and elsewhere along the political spectrum perceive this rally. The business sectors' opposition to a strike could also translate into reduced support for individual pan-blue candidates around election time. And that means less money for increasingly expensive campaigns.
It is impossible to ignore the everyday people who have supported Shih's rally -- they identify with his idealism and the call for moral rectitude. But would their support be sufficient to make them join in a strike? This is nothing like donating NT$100 for the anti-Chen campaign, indicating support for Chen's resignation in polls or even joining the sit-in.
What is at stake is people's jobs, which puts bread on the family table and pays for school tuition fees. When the price for ousting a political leader with a less than clean moral record is so personal and so costly, how many people would actually join the cause?
This fact has not been overlooked by Shih's organizing team, which explains why Shih has been changing his tune -- if only slightly -- when pressed about the possibility of a strike.
Most people realize by now that the sit-in by itself isn't going to be enough to force Chen to step down. This is why Shih is making the risky move of threatening a strike.
So what happens next? It is not in anyone's interest for the impasse to continue indefinitely. Perhaps it is time to think about how to provide a way for Shih to exit the scene gracefully. Accomplishing this task should be the number one priority for the DPP government and Chen.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS