With lawyers representing Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) declaring last week that they would not appeal the Taipei District Court’s ruling ordering that Ko be detained and held incommunicado, the TPP leader can be detained for up to two months while investigations continue.
As the TPP and Ko have been embroiled in financial scandals and corruption probes since last month, many political analysts and pundits have been wondering whether the TPP’s supporters would turn to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) or the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and if the scandals would change the TPP’s strategies in working with the two major parties.
After Ko’s detention, the TPP pledged to “defend Ko’s innocence,” calling the judicial investigation political persecution, and claiming that the DPP-led government is imposing a “new authoritarianism” by working with prosecutors and the media.
The TPP is clear that it would not work with the DPP, who it paints as an enemy, questioning the impartiality of the judiciary in the process and even trying to stir up public fear that the “state apparatus” is setting out to silence anyone with opposing political beliefs in a new “green terror.”
However, the KMT, which was almost successful in forming a “blue-white alliance” and joint presidential ticket with the TPP to contest January’s presidential and legislative elections, and has been working closely with the TPP in the Legislative Yuan since February, has been displaying an ambiguous and incoherent attitude toward the TPP and Ko’s scandals.
KMT Taipei City councilors Chung Siao-ping (鍾小平) and Yu Shu-hui (游淑慧) have been vociferously questioning Ko’s involvement in the Core Pacific City redevelopment project, with the former having filed criminal complaints against Ko and the latter convening the city council’s investigation team on Ko and the Core Pacific City case.
While a few KMT officials expressed vague support for Ko, and a handful of legislators expressed confidence in continuing to work with the TPP in the new legislative session, most KMT members remained silent about the scandals, until last week.
KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) on Wednesday last week claimed that the DPP is instructing prosecutors and the media, eroding judicial fairness.
That same day, Yu said that some senior KMT members blamed her for “not seeing the bigger picture” and had attempted to persuade her to stop investigating the corruption case.
Chung also said that KMT caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) asked him “not to attack Ko so ferociously,” and another KMT Taipei city councilor even accused Chung of waging a personal vendetta against Ko because he had failed in his pursuit of a female TPP member.
Coincidentally, or perhaps not, China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesman Chen Binhua (陳斌華) on Wednesday last week said that President William Lai (賴清德) has been “manipulating the judiciary and administrative tools for private gains, uniting comrades to attack dissidents, and creating a ‘green terror,’” to “hunt down those who do not support the DPP or agree with ‘Taiwanese independence.’”
Some TPP supporters have already questioned whether their party is becoming “an appendage” to the KMT and not staying true to its independent “third force” stance. Many also remain skeptical about the KMT’s real intentions and suspect it is attempting to take advantage of the TPP’s crisis to poach its supporters.
With distrust in their ranks and uncertainty over the outcome of Ko’s case, it remains to be seen whether the TPP and KMT can persuade their backers and the public of the legitimacy of their cause, or whether they risk losing more disappointed supporters.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS