More than two weeks of heated discussions and speculation about which political party might win the legislative speakership ended with Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator-at-large Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) elected as the new speaker on Thursday.
However, “how to recall the legislative speaker” became a hot search term that same day, while new debates arose the following day.
As neither the KMT with its 52 legislative seats, nor the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) with its 51 seats, won more than half of the 113 legislative seats in last month’s elections, both parties’ speaker candidates visited the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislative caucus, hoping to gain the support of its eight legislators.
However, the TPP on Wednesday morning announced it would field its own candidate — Legislator-at-large Vivian Huang (黃珊珊) — with the party’s eight votes all going to her, and that if a speaker was not decided in the first voting round, they would not vote in the second round.
The DPP saw the TPP’s decision as direct support for Han, while the KMT was of course glad to see the move and its caucus convener Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) praised the TPP for standing with it in opposition to the DPP, saying that the KMT and TPP might continue to cooperate, including on assigning members to committees and selecting committee conveners.
Unsurprisingly, the KMT secured the speaker and deputy speaker roles.
However, veteran Taiwanese independence advocate Chen Yung-hsing (陳永興) on Friday published an open letter, detailing how he passed messages between TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and DPP Chairman and president-elect William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday evening, sparking more speculation and debate.
In his letter, Chen said that on the evening of Jan. 26, he received a phone call from Ko, who asked for helpt to relay messages to Lai about the possibility of the DPP supporting Huang in the first round of voting and the TPP supporting the DPP’s deputy speaker candidate in return. Although both sides were cordial and expressed goodwill, he knew the negotiations would fail as both parties refused to concede.
Chen’s letter sparked debates among the TPP and DPP, as Ko said that DPP members approached him first and that he only called back in response to Chen’s prior inquiry, while DPP spokesperson Justin Wu (吳崢) said the DPP did not propose the idea of supporting Huang as speaker and its former deputy speaker Tsai Chi-chang (蔡其昌) as the deputy speaker candidate. Ko yesterday said he might file a defamation lawsuit against Wu over allegedly proposing the murky speakership quid pro quo.
Moreover, it sparked speculation from pan-blue camp members of whether Ko wanted to coerce the DPP into cooperating with the TPP, and only yielded to letting the KMT win after its secret negotiations with the DPP failed, and if so, the KMT might need to reconsider trusting Ko and his party.
As details of the DPP-TPP negotiations remain unclear, the incident, as well as the failure of a KMT-TPP joint presidential ticket bid, Ko’s unproven claim that a broker offered him US$200 million to quit his presidential bid and other incidents, have shown his unreliability and opportunism, often making decisions at the last moment based on political machinations and leveraging for influence by threatening to shift alliances, rather than having principles.
As a new third party that could cast decisive votes on critical issues, the TPP could have a real impact if it stays true to its claims of serving the public interest and making decisions based on rationality and professional and scientific analysis, but if it continues to engage in double-dealing for personal or partisan gains and thinks it can outsmart everyone through manipulation, it is likely to be stuck once the KMT, DPP and the public repeatedly see through its tricks and no longer trust it.
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