Taiwan has a hard-won democracy, but that does not automatically mean it will last. Citizens must constantly vet those seeking office. Do they walk the walk as well as talk the talk? Perhaps more importantly, what exactly are they talking about?
The past provides cautionary examples. A prime one is chameleon former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Hsu Hsin-liang (許信良). In the 1970s, he served in the Taiwan Provincial Assembly for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After the Jhongli Incident, he ran as an independent and won the Taoyuan County commissioner seat only to be impeached for “anti-government activity.”
A decade of self-imposed exile and fundraising in the US followed before he would return, be pardoned and serve as chairman of the newly formed DPP.
Hsu proved to be the kind of person who needs to be at the front of the parade no matter who the procession is for.
In the following years, he so frequently switched sides — aligning with the DPP, the KMT, the New Party and even running as an independent — that people would ask: “Who is he with this year?”
Totally different has been former KMT legislative speaker and presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱).
She served the party well and loyally over the years. However, so strong was her pro-China unification talk that even the KMT felt compelled to pull her from the 2016 presidential race and replace her with KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) in his first stint as party chairman.
Then there is former Kaohsiung mayor Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜). Elected in 2018 on the promise of making everyone rich again, he quickly decided that he could run for president using the same message.
He lost and, to the credit of the citizens of Kaohsiung, suffered the ignominy of losing in a recall by more votes than he had received in his original mayoral run.
Against that historical backdrop, the controversies in the upcoming nine-in-one elections add grist for the mill.
In Taipei, KMT mayoral candidate Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) appears to have been hoisted on his own petard.
He touted his expertise in international business and law only to have the opposition point out that he was suspended from practicing law three times and that the “international company” he had worked for was a small firm that dealt with China.
The main spotlight shines on the Taiwan People’s Party’s (TPP) candidate for Hsinchu mayor, Ann Kao (高虹安). Her background reads as: “What could go wrong if a life of privilege is given control of the gravy train?”
Kao is a TPP legislator-at-large, which means she got the position as a reward and not through an election. So what did she do to gain that privilege?
When working on her doctorate at the University of Cincinnati, she received financial aid from the Institute for Information Industry, which expected her to work for it when she finished.
No sooner did she complete the degree than she met with Hon Hai Precision Industry founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) and took a job at his company. This forced the institute to bring up related issues and say that she plagiarized her dissertation from work done within the non-governmental organization.
As a legislator, Kao hired her reported boyfriend Lee Chung-ting (李忠庭) for a staff position where he answers her personal phone. Already drawing a hefty salary at another position, Lee apparently uses his double-dipping for Kao’s personal benefit.
There is something disconcerting in that anyone wishing to reach the legislator must go through her boyfriend. Would he still answer her phone if she became mayor of Hsinchu?
Whistle-blowers have also reported that Lee is not the only one providing “kickbacks.” Kao’s staff are reportedly expected to donate a percentage of their salaries to her campaign fund.
Like a TV drama, the election plot thickened when Broadcasting Corp of China chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) suggested that TPP supporters in Taipei vote for Chiang, while KMT supporters in Hsinchu vote for Kao.
Jaw has his own interesting background. He helped form the New Party as it broke from the KMT in the 1990s. Does he now want to come in from the cold and seek redemption with the KMT or does he just want to keep his hand in the game?
These are challenges that voters face as they separate the wheat from the chaff in the upcoming elections and ask: Do candidates walk the walk as well as talk the talk?
There is a final question they might ask each candidate: “Have you signed the pledge to never surrender the nation to China?”
I do not think Chiang’s and Kao’s names would be signatories on that list.
Jerome Keating is a writer based in Taipei.
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