A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed.
Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way.
Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has put the names of 32 KMT and 12 Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers at risk of facing recall votes. No Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers are subject to recall, as all eight are legislators-at-large, not elected to any constituency.
It was public anger against the disruptive and potentially dangerous actions of lawmakers in the previous legislative session that has led to this juncture. The anger is mainly directed at the opposition, while the motions against the DPP lawmakers were in retaliation.
Chu and the KMT have been trying to distract from the chaotic proceedings of the previous session, during which they passed controversial and — many would consider — unconstitutional amendments by emphasizing their more reasonable proposals this session. Could the idea to “bring down the Cabinet” have been another attempt at distraction from the recall proceedings? If so, it would have failed dramatically and likely had the opposite of the intended result.
According to Article 3 of the Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China (中華民國憲法增修條文), a vote of no confidence in the premier can be initiated by a petition of at least one-third of legislators. Should more than half vote to pass the no-confidence motion, the premier would have to offer his resignation within 10 days.
However, the president would have the option to dissolve the legislature, with elections for a new set of lawmakers required within 60 days.
Given the reason for the mass recall movement, it is unlikely that the KMT would do too well in new legislative elections. The same big names facing recalls now, including KMT caucus leader Fu Kun-chi (傅崐萁) and Deputy Legislative Speaker Johnny Chiang (江啟臣), are as likely to fall in new votes as they would be in a recall.
Moreover, a successful no-confidence vote would require the support of the TPP.
TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌) would be profoundly unwise to allow his party go from zero exposure in the recall movement to potentially zero seats following new legislative elections.
Had there indeed been any discussion within the KMT to push for a no-confidence vote, it would have been quickly rejected for the absurd idea that it is.
None of this does anything to reduce the panic among the KMT ranks about the mass recall. Indeed, the plunging morale has led to calls for Chu to step down as chairman. Among the names mooted as viable replacements are Fu, Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) and Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜).
Chu has had limited success in his role; he does need to go, but a new face would do little to assuage the public anger at what happened in the previous legislative session. Lu might be an effective chairperson, far more than Han, but if the public has issues with the KMT now, it is unlikely that it would fare any better with Fu in the driving seat.
There are moments in history when America has turned its back on its principles and withdrawn from past commitments in service of higher goals. For example, US-Soviet Cold War competition compelled America to make a range of deals with unsavory and undemocratic figures across Latin America and Africa in service of geostrategic aims. The United States overlooked mass atrocities against the Bengali population in modern-day Bangladesh in the early 1970s in service of its tilt toward Pakistan, a relationship the Nixon administration deemed critical to its larger aims in developing relations with China. Then, of course, America switched diplomatic recognition
The international women’s soccer match between Taiwan and New Zealand at the Kaohsiung Nanzih Football Stadium, scheduled for Tuesday last week, was canceled at the last minute amid safety concerns over poor field conditions raised by the visiting team. The Football Ferns, as New Zealand’s women’s soccer team are known, had arrived in Taiwan one week earlier to prepare and soon raised their concerns. Efforts were made to improve the field, but the replacement patches of grass could not grow fast enough. The Football Ferns canceled the closed-door training match and then days later, the main event against Team Taiwan. The safety
The National Immigration Agency on Tuesday said it had notified some naturalized citizens from China that they still had to renounce their People’s Republic of China (PRC) citizenship. They must provide proof that they have canceled their household registration in China within three months of the receipt of the notice. If they do not, the agency said it would cancel their household registration in Taiwan. Chinese are required to give up their PRC citizenship and household registration to become Republic of China (ROC) nationals, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Chui-cheng (邱垂正) said. He was referring to Article 9-1 of the Act
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
RSS