In a democratic society, the voters select politicians for elected office. These elected officials are then responsible for governing in their respective jurisdiction, and should undertake to perform all of the associated political and legal duties. If, for some reason, the politician that the voters had chosen falls short of the duties he or she is responsible for in that position, and cannot be relieved of this position before the term ends, then the work of the government cannot be carried out successfully. It is the voters that are left dealing with the repercussions of this failure of governance. Unfortunately, this is just a fact of life.
This is the situation that has been unfolding in Keelung. By most standards, the city of Keelung has, for several years now, seen the serious misuse of public resources, grievous lack of judgment in policy prioritization and questionable decisions when it comes to disaster response.
SHORTCOMINGS
This weekend, Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) survived a recall vote, with 86,604 votes against the recall and 69,934 for, with a turnout of 50.44 percent. Judging by the results, one would have to conclude that the majority of Keelung residents believe that Hsieh’s shortcomings are not serious enough to necessitate his leaving office before his term is up: They have decided to allow him to continue to serve as Keelung mayor.
As such, the city residents would have to put up with the repercussions of Hsieh’s continued governance, for good or for bad, especially the effect that it would have on the daily lives of ordinary people.
No matter how much the talking heads from other cities, counties or special municipalities have to say about the situation or how much sense their analysis made, they are not the people that would be affected by whether the recall was successful or not. Now that the recall has failed, residents of other locales would not have to carry the burden that is Hsieh’s leadership.
MISINTERPRETATIONS
It must also be said that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), to which Hsieh belongs, need not read too much into this rejection of the recall: It is not a national poll on the party that is showing the approval of the public; neither does it mean that the KMT has received a mandate from the country to continue its agenda within political arenas such as the Legislative Yuan.
The KMT needs to know that the public is very dissatisfied with its performance in the latest legislative session, seeking to grab more power for itself in the name of legislative “reform.”
NATIONWIDE SENTIMENT
In the recall campaign, the KMT mobilized the whole party’s machinery and members to support Hsieh and ensure that he was not recalled, but the result only reflects the latest trajectory of public opinion within Keelung itself and should not be extrapolated to the feeling within Taiwan as a whole.
If the KMT continues to disregard President William Lai’s (賴清德) call for reconciliation between the government and opposition parties — such as remarks he made during his Double Ten National Day address on Thursday last week — and misunderstands the public’s mood as a whole, the failed recall would only delay the eventual breakout of the public’s dissatisfaction with the KMT and the party would be emboldened to act on any further “retributive recalls” that it might be eyeing.
Roger Wu lives in New Taipei City and works in the service sector.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS