It is a treacherous world out there, and it is quickly becoming even more dangerous. Taiwan needs to be prepared for very real external threats, and to be prepared to stand on its own.
The government’s ability to react to changes in the international situation has been hampered by political disunity at home. Legislators from the two main parties — the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) — are facing a wave of recall motions. The Central Election Commission on Monday confirmed that the petitions to recall 32 KMT lawmakers have passed the first-phase review, while the motions to recall 12 DPP legislators are pending due to irregularities, with the petitioners given 10 days to meet the signature threshold.
The KMT is calling foul and saying that these numbers reflect intervention from the DPP; it is aware of, but prefers to distract from, the very real public ire that has led to this situation. It is not just that the KMT is reluctant to address the reasons behind the recalls; it has been fully cognizant that these were coming, ever since it — together with the Taiwan People’s Party — embarked on its program of controversial amendments in February last year.
It is the bane of the media in Taiwan that so much time, effort and print real estate are taken up with cross-strait issues and the threat from the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Politicians and journalists alike would love to concentrate on pressing issues and reforms that would benefit the lives of Taiwanese. The obsessive focus on the CCP’s ambitions and lies is wearying, but it is the CCP’s obsessive focus on annexing Taiwan that necessitates this.
Pretending an existential threat does not exist is no answer.
In his article published in today’s paper, KMT assistant director of international affairs Chance Hsu (須予謙) writes about how the recall motion is disruptive and politically motivated, and notes that the KMT would prefer to concentrate on social and economic reforms in the interests of Taiwan’s long-term stability and development. He also writes that the opposition should be allowed to execute its duty of providing checks and balances, as he says it is simply doing its job of providing oversight to the government’s budget.
These are perfectly reasonable propositions, except for two glaring omissions. First, working for a prosperous future means little if the nation’s future is in jeopardy. Second, these proposals were only made once the opposition had wrought havoc in the legislature, gutting government finances and depleting the defense budget, as well as hobbling mechanisms of checks and balances on the legislature’s own power, namely the Constitutional Court and the public’s right of recall.
The aim of the KMT’s project has, quite transparently, been the depletion of the administration’s ability to govern, and laying the foundations to prevent sufficient pushback from constitutional institutions or the recall motions that it knew would happen.
One needs to ask where the KMT’s idea for a NT$10,000 handout came from. It would certainly be welcome. It is just that it feels a bit too much like a sweetener offered to the electorate to make it better disposed to the KMT, despite the chaos it has brought upon the political process.
Now the KMT is considering pushing for a referendum to keep the death penalty — which it knows will be a win for it, given the overwhelming public support for capital punishment — and possibly to have the referendum held on the same day as the recall votes, in an obvious ploy to boost voter turnout.
Concentrating on social issues and reform is certainly important; what Taiwanese do not need is the dismantling, disruption and distraction. National security matters, and the wave of recalls did not come from nowhere.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals