As the presidential candidates of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are occupied with putting out fires — the former with preschool drugging, the latter with sexual harassment allegations — one candidate seems to be above the fray: Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founder, chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
However, Ko is still in the limelight after a series of diplomatic blunders. He had a spat with American China specialist Bonnie Glaser. During a Brookings Institution forum, Glaser said that compared with New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) of the KMT, Beijing would be “more comfortable” supporting Ko because he had a track record of handling relations with China. Ko interpreted that to mean that “he is the one most capable of communicating with China and the US.” When Glaser opposed Ko’s misinterpretation, Ko said: “Who gives a damn about her.”
At a defense forum, Ko said that if he is elected president, he would deploy cyberarmies to paralyze China’s high-speed rail system or ATMs, sending Beijing the message that Taiwan is “not to be messed with” and that it is capable of wreaking havoc if it is provoked. China responded by saying that comments to facilitate peace should be encouraged in cross-strait relations.
As a candidate in second place in the polls, people might wonder how Ko and his party came to have such influence and popularity. Ko’s rise to power and the values that he represents are the extension of the Sunflower student movement. Promises to “bring change to Taiwan’s political scene” or “tearing down the walls of the KMT and DPP” are what drew people to him. Ko’s party represents a refreshing spirit, value and political attitude that independent voters have been waiting for. However, Ko’s performance over the years has shown that he is not so different from other politicians, but perhaps has a sharper tongue.
With a track record of flaunting his IQ and occupation, Ko has shown that he is used to judging people by their social status. In Ko’s eyes, Glaser is just an academic seeking to get famous by talking about him. In fact, Glaser’s think tank plays an influential role in the US’ policy toward Taiwan. Aside from Ko making a fool of himself, Glaser’s remark underscored Ko’s potential threat to Taiwanese democracy.
Whatever or whoever China favors always works against Taiwan’s interests. Of course Beijing would consider Ko, a political chameleon who is always shifting his stances and prone to messing up foreign relations, as its favored candidate, as China would have the upper hand in cross-strait relations if he is elected president.
Although Ko might feel indifferent about his reputation, with some people calling him “dishonest,” he should feel ashamed that Glaser is implying that he could be easily manipulated by China. Instead, he is deceiving the public by framing himself as “the most reliable candidate.”
In contrast with its usual “wolf warrior” approach, China’s “slap on the wrist” response to Ko shows that Glaser was accurate in her observation: China is betting on Ko. If China were to “give Ko a hand” by taking the initiative to suspend its high-speed rail services and cut off ATM machines, then Ko would be giving China the perfect excuse to invade Taiwan. It could claim that Taiwan “made the first attack.” Under such circumstances, the US and other allies could not intervene.
Ko’s political style might only resonate with people in favor of demagoguery and pro-KMT ideology. Those who have seen Ko for what he is — conceited, dishonest and lacking vision on foreign relations — know that he is no longer the political reformer that he once promised to be.
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Following the BRICS summit held in Kazan, Russia, last month, media outlets circulated familiar narratives about Russia and China’s plans to dethrone the US dollar and build a BRICS-led global order. Each summit brings renewed buzz about a BRICS cross-border payment system designed to replace the SWIFT payment system, allowing members to trade without using US dollars. Articles often highlight the appeal of this concept to BRICS members — bypassing sanctions, reducing US dollar dependence and escaping US influence. They say that, if widely adopted, the US dollar could lose its global currency status. However, none of these articles provide
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
RSS