Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) wants it to be known that he believes in the democratic process, and he has made it clear that he has absolutely no concept of conventional party political wisdom. His announcement on Monday of his intention to stand as an independent candidate in next year’s presidential election has left many political commentators scratching their heads, due to the glaring contradiction between his stated purpose and the obvious outcome.
Gou is running against New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential nominee, and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), splitting the vote against Vice President William Lai (賴清德), the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) candidate.
Gou is framing his campaign as a call for “unity” among the putative “anti-green coalition” of opposition candidates. He is a competent, successful and intelligent man, but his plan to create unity out of division requires monumental effort to understand. It is either brilliant or daft, but nowhere in between.
In his news conference announcing his bid, he said that he is an entrepreneur with nearly five decades of experience, asking: “Who else is better suited to lead Taiwan’s political sphere?” The answer is an experienced politician with proven competence in policymaking and governance — not him.
Perhaps Gou is doubling down on his invitation to Hou and Ko to “have a coffee” and discuss a strategy to bring down the DPP administration, after they rebuffed his earlier invitation. His intention to enter the race only makes sense if he is attempting to get Hou and Ko to take him seriously, and to take him on as a trusted partner with a shared goal, even though he has done so much in the past few weeks to erode that trust. This would only work if he withdraws before the end of the campaign, but all indications are that he wants to see this through to the end. Neither Ko nor Hou stand to gain anything from engaging with him.
Even if this is a genuine attempt to force “unity” in the anti-green alliance, his entry into the field will result in mudslinging among him, Hou and Ko, with none of them emerging untainted. That would only benefit the DPP. Whatever Gou is thinking, he has just injected a fascinating new dynamic into this presidential campaign, and not least for what it says of the rise and fall of the KMT.
After decades as a party-state, followed by a period of two-party politics, Taiwan has waited a long time for a third force to break through. At one point, this might have been the New Power Party, but it has been Ko’s TPP, formed in 2019, that has taken on that mantle. In opinion polls, although not yet in elections, the TPP has all but overtaken the KMT as the DPP’s main rival. Now, Gou is shaking things up further. Are we witnessing the demise of the “century-old party”?
Whatever Gou’s plans for Hou, it is unthinkable that the KMT would let its candidate play second fiddle to a man it has rejected as its own nominee twice. That would be a fall too far. It is astounding that Gou would think it might consider that proposition.
The KMT is clearly rattled by Gou’s announcement, and has said it would discipline any member who offers him support. At the same time, even after the disruption and reneging on his promise to support Hou, the party has said it still hopes Gou might return to the KMT fold. That, too, is astounding.
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS