Until very recently, polling for next year’s election had placed the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) presidential candidate, New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), consistently in third place, behind Vice President William Lai (賴清德) of the Democratic Progressive Party and Taiwan People’s Party Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲).
His poor placing was partially blamed on a failure to communicate his policies or vision with clarity.
However, a new poll has Hou in second place, either in a three-horse race with Lai and Ko or a four-way race with recent entrant Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘).
In the new poll, Hou is at 21.5 percent, behind Lai at 29.2 percent with three candidates; or at 18.4 percent, behind Lai’s 29.4 percent with Gou in the mix.
Could it be that Hou’s messages are finally getting through?
Hou is currently on a trip to the US. During a visit to the Brookings Institution in Washington, the KMT candidate revealed his approach to cross-strait relations if he is elected president: his so-called “3Ds strategy” of “deterrence, dialogue and de-escalation.”
This is a solid, easily understood messaging, and it is certainly about time he delivered something voters can get their teeth into.
Unfortunately, when they do, they will find it wafer thin and stale, as expired as an imported egg.
Talking to Taiwanese reporters in Washington, Hou stayed firmly on script, repeating that he intended to secure peace and stability through increased dialogue, exchanges and opening channels of communication with Beijing, based on the principles of the Republic of China Constitution and the Act Governing Relations Between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area (臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例), rejecting Beijing’s “one country, two systems” at the same time as rejecting Taiwanese independence.
This is KMT orthodoxy. It is no different from the fare offered by former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) a decade ago.
The problem for Hou is that, even if he manages to win the presidency, he would find that, in the words of Bob Dylan: “You can go back, but you can’t go back all the way.”
At least four major dynamics have shifted since the heady days of Ma.
First, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is far more aggressive and assertive: Xi has linked annexation to “one country, two systems” and has refused to rule out an invasion.
Second, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has studiously avoided being provocative to China. Hou’s problem is that increased cross-strait tensions are not Taiwan’s doing, they are due to changes of the dynamic in the international situation brought about by the cumulative effect of Beijing’s aggressive posture, the COVID-19 pandemic, Xi’s cozying up to Russian President Vladimir Putin and the loss of trust in the CCP among major players within the international community, including the US, the EU, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea.
These include studies conducted about the geopolitical implications of an annexation of Taiwan by China, even if it were not through an invasion, although the analysis of academics in many nations would be that a failure of the US to succeed in repelling an invasion would deliver a catastrophic blow to US global influence.
Third, the Taiwanese electorate has increasingly moved away from identification with China and what the KMT is offering — if Hou wants to turn the clock back a decade, he would find he is wearing distinctly dated attire.
Fourth, the US position on Taiwan has evolved significantly since Ma was in office.
Hou has learned the need to be clear. Now we need details, and a vision more suited to the times.
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for
RSS