We are now less than a month away from the vote to recall Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜), scheduled for June 6. There has been a perceptible change on the ground in Kaohsiung in the dynamics of the campaign surrounding the vote.
This change has been in the shift from the mobilization of political forces to considerations and discourse surrounding the rational choice of individual residents. Unfortunately for Han, this shift is part of a tide that is going to be difficult to turn back.
Nobody is saying, of course, that the recall motion is not a political move, and the mayor’s reputation has far from sustained a precipitous plunge.
The rather lukewarm response to the recall motion thus far is perhaps because the majority of Kaohsiung residents have hitherto not really been all that interested in political fighting and opposition.
However, Han has done himself very few favors, with a string of unforced errors that have left residents with a mounting sense of alarm.
The recall vote has now become a choice connected to the development of the city; it has become so much more than a simple election for who is to be mayor.
Some people have begun taking a rational look at this attempt to recall Han.
It seems to this author that, in the past few days and weeks, the residents of Kaohsiung have arrived at the determination that, above and beyond personal and political enmities on the part of some, the most important aspect of this recall vote is that this individual — whom so many paid attention to at the outset and of whom many had so much expectation — has utterly failed to deliver on his campaign promises over the past 18 months of being in city hall, and has fallen well short of the expectations those who voted for him had.
Not only was he in a rush to have a stab at the presidency, he has also sought to grab at any excuse available to avoid answering questions at the Kaohsiung City Council.
In short, his performance as mayor has been totally unacceptable to the people of Kaohsiung.
At the same time, Han has been acting as if there were nothing to be concerned about, and that he had not done anything close to being worthy of reproach.
How is this fair to the city’s residents?
Since its inception, the move to recall Han has encountered much criticism and yet Han has declined to address it directly himself, preferring to avoid the topic altogether, much to the frustration of the residents of the city he is supposed to serve.
It remains to be seen whether the city’s residents will use the recall vote to vent their frustration.
Internal polling for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) says it all.
In the run-up to June 6, this author gets the distinct impression that there is an increasingly objective, rational atmosphere descending upon the city, the manifestation of a reaction to a mayor who has relied on soundbites more than he has on laying the foundations for the future of Kaohsiung.
The objective of this vote has now become finding a way to reduce tensions and to allow Kaohsiung, in the shortest time possible, to return to its former vitality.
It is precisely this kind of rational calculus that led to the aforementioned result in the KMT’s internal polling.
Those results must have made for very uncomfortable reading for Han.
Li Kuan-long is a lecturer at Shih Chien University’s Kaohsiung campus.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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