Vice President William Lai (賴清德), the Democratic Progressive Party’s presidential candidate, on Monday last week told a forum in Yilan County that next year’s election is a choice between Zhongnanhai — the corridors of power in Beijing — and the White House.
“If a Taiwanese president can enter the White House, we will have achieved the political objective that we have been pursuing,” he said.
Asked about Lai’s remarks, Taiwan People’s Party Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) said: “We are vying to be the president of Taiwan, not a US state governor. Neither are we applying to be a foreign domestic helper in the White House.”
After his comment drew a backlash, Ko said that even though the US is an important ally, the president of Taiwan must remain autonomous, reiterating his policy of maintaining equidistant relations with Washington and Beijing. He later added on Twitter that Lai’s stated political objective “wasn’t enough,” meaning that Taipei should have good relations with every member of the international community.
As always happens in politics, and especially during major election campaigns, candidates’ words are misunderstood — either genuinely or intentionally — or distorted, if not by the candidates themselves, then by political commentators, the media or members of the public. Suffice it to say that both candidates have legitimate points, but it is important to cut through the political haze and the candidates’ respective agendas.
Ko’s position has legitimate value, which is why he believes the election should not be a choice between Washington and Beijing. He is also correct that ideally, the president of Taiwan should not value the relationship with the US over the exclusion of those with other countries.
This is, of course, not what Lai meant. If Taiwan’s president can be welcomed into the White House — without drawing an extremely negative reaction from Beijing — it would show that the nation has finally been officially recognized as part of the international community.
Indeed, if the US led on this, the governments of other countries would surely follow.
Ko also neglected to mention that the reason Lai would have to choose between Zhongnanhai and the White House is that the former would almost certainly refuse to deal with him, as it has with President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) since 2016. A less charitable interpretation of Ko’s omissions and apparent misreading of Lai’s point is that he is simply appealing to US skeptics to attract more pro-blue camp voters by criticizing his political rival.
Tsai has appointed Lai to attend the Aug. 15 inauguration of Paraguayan president-elect Santiago Pena. The vice president is to transit through the US on his way to Asuncion. Lai would not be visiting the White House, nor is he expected to meet any high-ranking US officials. Furthermore, it is customary for Taiwanese officials to travel through the US when visiting allies in South or Central America.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Mao Ning (毛寧) said that Beijing has already lodged a complaint with the US, objecting to its “connivance” with “Taiwanese separatists” by allowing Lai’s stopover.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday said that the stopover is “very routine” and that Beijing should not use it as a pretext for initiating provocative actions.
All of Taiwan’s presidential candidates should welcome a US official as senior as Blinken speaking up for the vice president and pushing back against Beijing’s intimidation. They should also support Lai on his mission of goodwill to a diplomatic ally, regardless of whether it is in their political interest during this campaign. It is certainly in the national interest.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS