Morally bankrupt - the nastiness within Taiwan politics laid bare

"Values are like fingerprints. Nobody's are the same but you leave them all over everything you do." Elvis Presley.

Politics has always been a dirty game, but at least there are shreds of decency, a certain level of moral standards, and red lines that most intelligent and mentally functional politicians and commentators won’t step over.

If you can’t carry your argument without resorting to the moral gutter, you are unfit to be a politician, let alone a mere social-media slave commentator only really interested in clicks and views.   

That said, the latest furore over Wang Zhi-an’s comments on The Night Show about Chen Jun-han Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) had taken the bar even lower to the disgust of any right thinking people. 

It is the equivalent of throwing paint over someone on a train to get a reaction and clicks and views. YouTube is full of this kind of childish stupidity which reduces us all to the level unfit to compare to our planet's animals.     

Wang’s assertion Chen was only rolled out by the DPP to win the sympathy vote is as naive as it is ridiculous and to add the insult of a fit person mimicking someone with involuntary muscle spasms in front of a television audience demonstrates a mind devoid of decency and an individual who is morally bankrupt.     

I guess to Wang, Stephen Hawking, one of the greatest theoretical physicists of our generation deserves similar ridicule, or wheelchair bound US 26th President Teddy Roosevelt despite his Nobel Prize and other achievements. Hawking had late onset Motor Neurone Disease and Roosevelt late onset Poliomyelitis. But Wang seems fine to ridicule such people despite him being only an upstart with a tiny internet voice. 

The comparison is indeed, stark. 

If ridiculing those stricken with disease gives some kind of perverse pleasure and makes you happy then I hope you sleep soundly at night, but please don't act surprised when those with higher morals decry you and point out that you are a disgusting human being not to be taken seriously.

Those outraged by Wang’s antics are more in tune with Western thinking. Talk that The Night Show is ‘American style’ as wide of the mark as it is possible to be. Subtile and humorous satire it certainly is not and making fun of someone’s physical disability would be roundly attacked by all in places like the US and the UK. 

Please make no mistake, if Wang says this is how it is in the west he is lying and just doesn’t understand despite having lived there. The young man is either a dimwit, or, more likely, simply being outrageous for attention. Personally, I think it is a bit of both.      

Wang’s behaviour is simply to gain attention and clicks and views just as internet pranksters are forced to do. It’s pathetic and sad they simply don’t have the intellect to gain an audience via good argument.  

But more depressing is the fact that quite a few, and young people at that, are saying there was nothing wrong with what he said and did. 

I can just about understand that someone desperate for clicks and views can stoop so low to gain notoriety as they aren’t smart enough to do it any other way. But for others to support such exploits is a sad statement on how society is, and indicates the erosion of morals in the people around you on this island.

Taiwan cannot allow this kind of disgusting behaviour to pass unnoticed and I’m glad it has become headline news. The TPP supporters posting messages saying all this OK are misguided, and will rightly be proved wrong by the majority voice of right minded people.

They are also showing themselves up for what they really are. Unfeeling, unsympathetic, ignorant hangers on to what is - to all intents and purposes - a cult. Their comments show them for what they are. Slavish drones unable to think or analyse things for themselves. It’s sad. 

Wang is Chinese. So his behaviour is no real surprise as his brain has been thoroughly washed. China’s young have no faith and no respect for others built into their psyche from birth. I lived in India for six years before living in China for four years and the major difference between the two is the lack of faith in China. Indians grow up to respect other people, from my observations Chinese children grow up thinking they are Princes and Princesses and behave accordingly.

Wang is a classic example of such an offspring. Zero humility, massive ego.  

The mainlander Wang is such a child. He is a clicks and views kid, devoid of critical thinking skills and is only seeking notoriety. He is insignificant and after this, we will never hear from him again despite his swaggering about getting a Japanese or US passport. 

The worrying thing is people here are supporting his views and I’m concerned that others are being influenced by this evil and click-based fool. They are clearly not smart enough to know they are being played. 

I would encourage all those who waded in on social media to reflect how they would feel if their brother, sister, mother, father, uncle, auntie, grandad or grandma were similarly disabled? How would they feel if someone went on national television and made fun of them and everyone laughed along?

A final word about the unprofessionalism of the presenters. Guys, listen to what you guests say and don’t just laugh along with them like unthinking robots. Run your interviews, take control, and most importantly, listen to what people say and do. Clapping like a bunch of seals seeking fish at feeding time is a poor look and you really need to learn your trade. 

This is the vile side of politics and creeping degradation of decency is a slippery slope. Shrug off making fun of disabled people today, tomorrow you may see the wholesale hatred of other sections of society. 

This is a worrying reminder of how common decency can fall out of society under the direction of politicians seeking more influence and power. Read the history books and it’s easy to find out what happens... if this happens.  

A slippery slope, the thin end of the wedge, call it what you will…please God, Taiwan does not go down this route. 

Tinkerty Tonk...

 

BFF - Taiwan 💕 United States

So here we all are with an election result which, as most headlines around the world put it - was a rebuff to China - and by any relevant measure was a convincing demonstration the vast bulk of the Taiwanese people want to avoid getting any closer to China they already are. 

It is clear, even to this foreigner, that the KMT and TPP are China friendly, while the DPP policy is one of guarded engagement, the status-quo and, while not wanting to mention the dreaded ‘I’ word, a country at ease with itself with its democracy of elected rulers and officials, its own laws, its own economy, army, police force, economy, education and health system. 

All institutions that would surely bleed away under Chinese rule as we are currently witnessing with Hong Kong. Not to mention the total loss of freedom-of-speech. 

The DPP loss of overall control of the legislature does carry some dangers if both the KMT and TPP move to attempt to get closer to China against the DDP’s and the new President's basic policies.

But after the unedifying farce of their pre-election attempts to share the Presidency, it would appear there is little likelihood either of them will be able to hone their negotiating skills enough to ever agree on anything of much importance. 

The ex-Taipei mayor’s almost cartoonish glum face splashed across front-pages when the talks collapsed, aptly demonstrated that his ego is way more important to him than policy making. One can only hope their embarrassing squabbles will continue and any madness about getting closer to China will fade as they chest-bump each other like Saturday night drunks in a seedy bar. 

The leader of the KMT and his pleasant but vacant grin didn’t seem to know quite what was happening throughout the entire process and clearly had former KMT President Ma’s hand stuck up his back like a ventriloquist's dummy. 

While the loss of the majority is certainly an issue for the DPP and is certainly a barrier to policy-making, many countries are in the same boat in terms of legislative majorities and get on with things perfectly well, although at a generally slower rate.

The outlying wings of any political party can step in at any time to scupper government initiatives, even if parliamentary votes are whipped. Evidence of this is unfolding before our very eyes with UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak completely failing to control his party as the right-wing rebels over an immigration bill. And that is with a large majority without the need to work with a third party. Note the Conservative initial 80-seat majority has been hacked back by by-elections after scandals and resignations.  

So it’s not the end of the world, and I would be quietly confident that if the KMT and TPP band together to try and do something mad like cutting back on defence spending - as we all know some in their ranks would like to do - there would be rebels in their ranks who would defy the whip. That, together with an accompanying public outcry would likely prevent anything stupid happening with regards to China. 

I’m still struggling to come to terms with the fact that one KMT legislator tried to sabotage the launch of Taiwan’s first Hai Kun Class submarine by leaking information about it. In many countries that would be classed as an act of treason.

So madness and stupidity aside, the importance of William Lai’s win, lies more with Taiwan’s diplomatic standing in the world and mainly its continued good relationship with the United States. Of the three candidates he is clearly the best choice to get out there and argue Taiwan’s case around the world and glad-hand its allies.  

The US reaction to his victory was an almost immediate trip by a high-level delegation of former top officials who arrived the following day, and just as immediately testing China’s reaction to the election result. Try to persuade me this was a coincidence or that the trip had not been planned months ago in the event of a Lai victory. 

To this end, Lai’s new job puts him at the forefront of keeping the US on-side and building the diplomatic relationship with its key long-time ally. As Chinese jets overfly Taiwan on a daily basis, their warships test the waters around and thousands of missiles are aimed at you and I, what could be more important than the one country which would step in and help if China goes as crazy as Russia’s President Putin did with Ukraine. 

All that said, it can be hard to like America. It can be brash, crass and selfishly capitalist. It can be self-centred, inward-looking, wilfully difficult and, at times, downright idiotic. 

On top of its existing flawed genetics, the world is currently looking on with amazement at the legal shenanigans surrounding the former president and the apparent madness of some of its political figures whose lies and behaviour, not to put too fine a point on it, is also criminal.

In 1939, soon to be British Prime Minister Winston Churchill described Russia as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma" during a radio address on the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. It was a metaphorical shrug of the shoulders of puzzlement about a country’s behaviour and actions.

The United States is the same. It is so full of contradictions and currently so volatile politically that it is hard to understand, muchless predict, its behaviour. That said, recent events should, in themselves, be enough to lend weight to the argument that the Good Ole U S of A should be seen as Taiwan’s main hope of salvation. 

There have been two recent announcements which seem to have passed Taiwan media editorial meetings un-noticed. No surprise there, I guess. 

The first was just before Christmas when the US announced it was, as the CNN headline put it “US Air Force to reclaim Pacific airfield that launched atomic bombings as it looks to counter China.” 

This is a significant move and has not had the publicity in Taiwan it deserved. The Pacific airfield they are looking to Air Force is looking to reclaim is on Tinian which is part of the North Mariana Islands which is around 200 kilometres north-east of Guam and 2,760 south-east of where I’m currently sitting by the Tamsui River.   

It is a place out of memory but nevertheless highly significant historically. Those of you with Google Earth can see what it looks like now but in its heyday it was deemed to be the busiest airport in the world - well, there was a war on. Tinian served as the forward operating base in the Pacific and from where it made relentless attacks on the Philippines, Okinawa, and mainland Japan. It was reported the ground literally shook as planes took off every minute of every day. 

It is also notable as the place where America’s B-29 Superfortress bomber Enola Gay and three days later Bockscar took off from to drop the Little Boy (17 Kilotons) and Fat Man (21 Kilotons) nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. A Kiloton is a unit of explosive power equivalent to 1,000 tons of TNT. This attack ended World War II so Tinian has a significant place in history. 

While its runways are now overgrown with the relentless jungle, the US Air Force plans to spend millions making the airbase operational again. It is worth noting that Taiwan lies around the same distance from Tinian as Japan does so is most certainly within its operational parameters. It is the perfect place for the US to step in and protect Taiwan from the air.

Also, just before Christmas U.S. President Joe Biden signed into law a record-breaking US$886 billion defence policy package which included measures to counter Chinese military activity in the Indo-Pacific region and assist Taiwanese forces.

Globally, China has the second biggest defence spending below the US but it is around a third of the size at around $300 billion. Their military machine is also likely to be far less sophisticated than the US, just as Russia’s military machine proved to be far less effective than a lot of people thought before Ukraine. Remember the predictions after the Ukraine invasion that it would all be over in a week and here we are nearly two years later?

The likely poor state of China’s military seems to be borne out by Xi’s recent purge of corrupt generals following shortfalls in the quality of army equipment including missiles. Bloomberg has a good story about this under the headline - US Intelligence Shows Flawed China Missiles Led Xi to Purge Army - if you want to look it up.    

Meanwhile Japan, historically constrained by its pacifist constitution adopted after surrendering in WWII, is now embarking on a record military expansion and on the same day approved a 16 percent increase in military spending for 2024 to US$56 billion. So Taiwan’s allies are moving in the right direction in any potential defence of the island.

Taiwan is anyway a difficult country to invade from the sea because of its largely rocky coastline, supply lines would be long and difficult to maintain and the only real alternatives are parachute troops or bombing, both extremely risky strategies militarily and diplomatically. 

Add to that the fact that the world would likely react extremely negatively and impose strong sanctions on China in the event of an armed invasion, just as they did on Russia with Ukraine. With the South China Sea dispute an invasion would trigger a wave of unrest across Asia and only serve to isolate China even further and engender a pretty much global wave of hatred towards it. 

I see the likelihood of a military invasion by China as extremely remote.

The one person who might actually scupper any defence of Taiwan by the US could be a man who has proven himself to be an untrustworthy liar and false friend, Donald Trump. The Washington Post says it tracked Trump's false or misleading claims at 30,573 over 4 years. He faces four criminal indictments, two on state charges and two on federal charges. These indictments amount to a total of 91 felony charges.

It’s ironic this is the very man some Taiwanese I meet think he will somehow become the saviour of Taiwan if he regains the presidency. This thinking is fundamentally flawed and seems to be only based on the simplistic notion that because Trump stood up to China more publicly and more aggressively than previous administrations he will obviously pull out all the stops over Taiwan. 

These people could not be more wrong. The current US administration is being tough on China by spending vast sums beefing up the US Pacific military presence and committing to maintaining peace in the Pacific.

Trump also loves Xi and admires him hugely. He described Xi as an exceptionally intelligent individual who governs China’s population with “iron” authority. “Think of President Xi. Central casting, brilliant guy. You know, when I say he’s brilliant, everyone says, ‘Oh that’s terrible',” said Trump. “Well, he runs 1.4 billion people with an iron fist. Smart, brilliant, everything perfect. There’s nobody in Hollywood like this guy.” 

These are the rantings of, I’m sorry to say, an unstable and untrustworthy man and Trump has proved he is happy to push his old friends, allies, lawyers and employees under a bus if it suits him. I would argue he is probably more likely to come down on the side of Xi in a Taiwan invasion scenario, rather than a different president who most likely continues on the current path of putting in place expensive initiatives to keep China at bay in the Pacific.

As president, this man would again be Commander-in-Chief of the military. It really doesn’t bear thinking about if the chips were down with Xi, who he appears to love so much, quite what this unbalanced individual would do. 

If you live in Taiwan you really need to hope Trump is not successful in his current bid to regain the White House. He is way more likely to pull the US away from the Pacific and Taiwan as part of his America First policy. Anyone who thinks the opposite is deluding themselves, or at least gambling on the fact that Trump really has the intellectual capacity to deal with an invasion in a way that would result in anything other than making himself look good.     

Winnie the Pooh once said “A day without a friend is like a pot without a single drop of honey left inside." 

The United States is Taiwan’s pot of honey. I hope we don’t lose the last drop.  

Tinkerty Tonk...      

五漢廢言後的群組對話流出

 

Recriminations - That post press conference Whatsapp group chat in full

 

Presentation - Zhang Men Brewery - Kaohsiung November 18, 2023

 

3000 rounds? Yeah, like in the bar afterwards

There’s an old saying amongst copy editors as to whether something in a piece they are editing passes the ‘smell test’. It usually applies to something that sounds exaggerated or morally wrong. Basically, does it look wrong, or fake.

So when our Coconut Cop tried to emphasise what a heroic and lionhearted president he would make, he regaled his audience with a tale of when he faced down three dangerous criminals in an encounter which saw 3000 shots fired. Three Thousand? That doesn’t pass the smell test. 

After some light searching I discovered that what is known as the North Hollywood Shootout is broadly agreed to be the biggest shootout in American history. Two heavily armed bank robbers wearing body armour faced off 64 armed LAPD police officers resulting in the robbers' deaths plus injuries to 12 officers and eight civilians.

It was such a big event they even made a movie about it, although I guess that is no real surprise as it did happen in Hollywood. (44 Minutes: The North Hollywood Shoot-Out. This is the best quality version I could find on YouTube and it’s really not bad.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PUAd8MvqEY

The point is, it is estimated that 2000 shots were fired during the incident which is why our wannabe president’s claim of 3000 at his incident doesn’t pass the smell test, it being 50 percent higher.

I guess you could conclude he was leading a group of dangerously trigger-happy officers whose aim was so appallingly bad that it required emptying all that ammo at their three offenders. Who, nevertheless must have ended up with more holes than Swiss Cheese simply by the law of averages.

I searched for this incident, without success. Maybe it’s worth making a quick movie to bolster his fearless image ahead of January’s vote.

Tinkerty Tonk...    

Taiwan politics, turning into a strange animal

A political caricature of the United States Senate from 1894
Credit Library of Congress

Taiwan’s Presidential election looms, putting an end to Tsai Ing-wen’s eight years at the helm. 

While the political cycle appears to continue normally, I find myself increasingly puzzled and worried by the machinations going on within both global and Taiwan politics.

The madness of tens of thousands of deaths in Ukraine and thousands dead in Israel and Gaza, to the craziness of the Trump trials in the United States and the bitter internal battles within the Republican Party to the disintegration of the British Conservative Party and their equally bitter internal battles, it would be easy to believe diplomacy and common-sense has left the building.

After the horrors of World War Two, one would be forgiven that just a generation later we are slowly sinking back to the bad old days, rather than progressing and building a better world for everyone. 

Add to this unprecedented weather events and a continued disbelief by many that  man-assisted global warming actually exists to anti-oil protestors blocking roads in many countries and causing chaos, to anti-woke and anti-immigrant right-wing groups finding a greater voice, it’s hard to remain optimistic as we head into 2024. 

If nothing else, for those of us who keep an eye on global geo-politics 2024 will be an ‘interesting’ year. 

I now live quietly on the west bank in Bali so I’m also perhaps more interested in what happens here in Taiwan and what I’m seeing worries me. Is Taiwan moving down a path which will damage its young democracy in tandem with the madness we are witnessing elsewhere in the world? 

In my 40 years of front-line reporting of geo-politics around the world, I am watching political battles on this Beautiful Isle that are perhaps unique, in my experience anyway. I’m a long way from being an expert in Taiwan politics but I am fast coming to the conclusion that it has a unique quirkiness, although I can’t decide whether that is a strength, or a weakness. Is it pragmatic, or just daft with little political acumen behind it?

For whatever reason, my wife Joyce generally chooses to relay the blow-by-blow latest political goings-on when we get in the car. While driving I receive a running commentary on the latest progress, or, more often the lack of it. Oftentimes it makes little sense and certainly doesn’t jive with my experiences elsewhere in the world.

The latest news which made me sit up and listen a little harder was ex-Policeman Plod and erstwhile New Taipei City Mayor saying he would be happy if he does not achieve his goal of becoming Taiwan’s eighth President and would instead be happy as deputy. 

This is almost shockingly absurd for someone pushed forward by his party for the top job to then turn around and tell them he doesn’t really want it and would be happy to lose out to someone else from another party.  

I wonder what the KMT party managers’ opinion of this was? Kuomintang, founded in November 1894 and a major political party in the Republic of China, initially based on the Chinese mainland and then in Taiwan since 1949 appears not to be bothered about regaining the Taiwan Presidency? How sad is that? Such a long established political party appears happy to commit political suicide by openly stating it is no longer seeking the highest office and willing to hand over decades of governance to, er, a party less than five years old.        

Maybe it’s an astute political move but I’m afraid that thinking is lost to me and I am genuinely puzzled unless Hou Yu-ih is somehow actively trying to destroy the KMT’s political credibility from within. 

In my humble opinion such self-destruction would be no bad thing for Taiwan, particularly against the background of overt Mainland aggression and the danger of a Beijing takeover via a China friendly administration. To openly say this less than three months before the election you have all but given up makes zero political sense unless there is no fight left in the KMT and it is happy to retire from front-line politics and wither and die. 

How are voters expected to react? Voting for someone to be President who has openly stated he is not bothered if he becomes President or not, is surely a wasted vote. I’d be extremely angry if I were a party member to be let down so badly and be told ‘sorry guys we can’t really be bothered and are happy if another party wins the Presidency’. 

He is frightened of the job and thinks he cannot do it is the one obvious conclusion. He is unsure, or disagrees with KMT policies and thinks another President can better help run the country, is quite another. Either one points to massive weakness within the KMT and a huge whack of self-doubt seldom seen among high-level politicians. 

I’m more used to those seeking high office to do whatever it takes to get the job and implement their policies for what they believe is the betterment of the country as a whole. The problem generally arises around those hell-bent on achieving high office and then screwing things up, evidenced by the last four British Prime Ministers. 

To roll over and admit he is just not that bothered, Hou Yu-ih demonstrates a weakness and lack of conviction and that he is likely frightened of the job. Clearly the KMT chose their candidate extremely poorly. Terry Gou can at least string a sentence together. 

What will Hou Yu-ih campaign slogan be in the coming weeks as the competition hots up? What will he yell from the platform at rallies? “Don’t vote for me as someone else will be a better President than me, I’m really not bothered either way” Will the party faithful punch the air and scream “Yes, don’t vote KMT as someone else can likely do it better than our candidate.” 

It’s all very puzzling and, not to put too fine a point on it, ridiculous in the game of democratic politics. 

I’d be the first to admit that bipartisanship can be a good thing when high-level policies need to be enacted and there are many examples where opposition parties stop just criticising the government and vote with them for sensible and pragmatic reasons. It happens all the time to the good of ordinary people. 

Maybe we are at a point in Taiwan where the opposition parties simply oppose and criticise government policy because in their Dummy’s Guide to Politics it says that’s what they should always do.

I have to say I perceive few actual solid and workable or affordable policies coming from the opposition parties and most seem to be badly costed or just pie-in-the-sky wishes which will never happen, like a 1 million TWD subsidy for the third child, or a 230 billion TWD long-term care fund. 

What I see is apparently blind, constant criticism and gaslighting on pretty much every issue and an avoidance of the really big issues, like the Elephant in the room, China.

For the 120-year old KMT with 38 seats in a legislature of 113 total, to roll-over to an upstart four-year old TPP which has five, would be an amazing event which must have the DPP with 62 seats feeling quietly confident as long as these two oppositions continue to bicker, moan and whine, and continue to fail to come with with any credible policies of their own.

Already the embryo tie up is descending into farce if the latest batch of statements from both the KMT and TPP are anything to go by.   

Political coalitions, of course, exist in many countries and can be successful but most coalitions are made after voting takes place in order for the bigger party to secure a governing majority ie. The David Cameron UK Conservative 2010 coalition administration with the Liberal Democrats where its leader Nick Clegg served as deputy Prime Minister. It was actually a disaster, but that’s another story. 

Pre-Electoral Coalitions in Presidential Systems such as being vaunted by the KMT and TPP do exist, particularly in South America, but tend to be problematic because parties cannot use pre-electoral coalitions to secure money, patronage or government benefits under the control of presidents as they cannot be held accountable to the previous party agreements. 

This would seem to be the situation which is uncomfortably unfolding in Taiwan where  negativity in the form of hurting a popular existing administration takes precedence over positive policies aimed at convincing the electorate that their vote will be worthwhile. Does such a stance demonstrate a willingness to improve things, or just a blind aim to destroy a political adversary by fair means or foul with no real regard to the consequences? 

The furtherance of actual stated policies would not seem to be high on the agenda for the opposition as I detect little in the way of manifesto promises at this stage outside of openly criticising everything the current administration do or say… and an unhealthy obsession with high-end vaccines and eggs. 

Tinkerty Tonk...

Credibility - sadly lacking

Looking around the world, it seems there is a surfeit of lightweight and wannabe politicians and the list is growing, pretty much by the day.

Almost every week I see yet another example of someone in high office, or seeking high office, making fools of themselves as they simply do not have the gravitas, quick-wittedness, intelligence or moral compass to be able to do the job they have, or aspire to. 

I’ve long thought that credibility was one of the main attributes for a political leader and its dictionary definition is ‘the quality of being trusted and believed in.’ But you need other skills to be a political leader and the key five leadership qualities are integrity (see point one), self-awareness, courage, respect, empathy, and gratitude.

Broadly speaking, you can sum these qualities up as statesmanship, which may at times blur the attributes alluded to above but nevertheless garner trust and support among voters who believe they will not be treated fairly, not lied to and understood by a leader who is trustworthy and believable. 

I have to say that looking at the four Presidential candidates for the January elections here in Taiwan, I struggle to find all but one that comes even close to fulfilling my criteria. 

Before we look at the home front. Let’s look around the world and some other leaders, and wannabe leaders. Former US President Donald Trump is probably the best (or worst) example of what I’m talking about. The still popular Trump is mired in 91 charges across four separate criminal cases plus numerous civil lawsuits. The criminal charges include trying to overturn the 2020 election results. Don’t forget, Trump could face 700 years in jail if found guilty on all charges. 

Next in my list of recent non-statesmen would be former UK prime minister Boris Johnson, sacked for lying, former UK prime minister Liz Truss, sacked for gross incompetence after just 49 days and former UK Prime Minister David Cameron who cowardly resigned after losing his Brexit referendum rather than sticking by the result and clearing up his own mess. 

A UK opposition leader called David Milliband once made a pitch at the UK Premiership but his utter lack of gravitas and charisma pretty much sunk his chances and his policies were pretty much a side issue. One newspaper famously said “Can you imagine this guy in the same room negotiating with Vladimer Putin?” The answer was a resounding no and Millband lost because he looked and acted like a lightweight who would not have been able to dance on the world political stage with any real credibility. 

There are opposite examples such as Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan who have made huge economic and foreign policy mistakes while in office but managed to cling onto power by dint of little more than their forceful personality, charisma and actually acting like they are a statesman in charge and able to cope. 

My point is, the forthcoming Taiwan Presidential election gels around the main issue for Taiwan which is China, to the exclusion of everything else. China is the issue. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has thrust Taiwan to the world’s front pages. It has not enjoyed such prominence in the world’s psyche for decades, if ever. 

People the world over have become aware of Taiwan and its situation after Ukraine, ironically because of many high profile media stories by journalists, who did not understand the situation, that “Taiwan is next” which was, of course, nonsense and I wrote that it was at the time. 

We recently returned to a three-month long trip to Europe and when people around me were aware that Taiwan was my homebase, their first question was “Are you worried about China?”. As I see it, their helicopter, 9000km view of Taiwan is the right one. China is overwhelmingly the main issue for Taiwan and should for everyone who lives here. 

A presidential election based on arguing about the price of eggs, xxxx xxx xxx xxxx. Is complete nonsense and ignores the elephant in the room. 

Taiwan needs a president who can, with credibility and all the above-mentioned qualities of integrity,   self-awareness, courage, respect and empathy sit in the same room as world leaders and argue Taiwan’s case and solicit help against a potential invader. A potential invader which has hundreds of missiles aimed at it and daily threatens with air and seaborne threats.

What other issue will voters be thinking about when they cast their ballot? “Oh, I don’t like paying more for my eggs so I won’t vote for the current government”...”xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx 

When I look at the four candidates Taiwan has, and I have no dog in this fight as I am unable to vote, I see three candidates which do not fit my criteria as being able to do a pragmatic political dance in keeping a potential invader at bay and being effective in garnering political support from elsewhere in world and dancing on the world political stage to effectively do this. (look at Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and you will get the idea as he as done this extremely effectively)  

By my measurements they are lightweights, more intent on scoring mind-numbingly minor political points while studiously avoiding the elephant in the room - China- either for ideological, personal or cowardly reasons. The media here does a shocking job in calling them out, sadly. 

Doesn’t Taiwan need someone who would be vocal in their opposition to having the PLA Navy sailing up the Tamsui River past my flat in the coming years?

While that might be a stretch given the sensitivities involved, China is the main issue in the coming election. Even if unspoken, candidates can be more vocal in assuring people their hearts and minds are in the right place with regards to China and its ambitions about Taiwan. 

It seems to me, all four candidates for the Presidency are frightened to do so, but three of them moreso. Politics is a delicate game but there comes a time to put up, or shut up. Maybe, without mentioning the dreaded “I” word, one of the candidates should step up and declare in strident tones at least the status quo is a line in the sand and make this an election issue. 

I remember Winston Churchill in my home country and how fifty years ago I watched his funeral on our black and white TV when he was hailed as a national hero for his part in keeping the UK democratic and helping the world win the war over fascism and oppression.

A truly great wartime leader who was unceremoniously kicked out of office after the war when the people realised he was not the peacetime leader they wanted. He is still widely revered, and is seen as a good wartime leader but not a good peacetime leader. 

Does Taiwan need a leader who can somehow get it in the best position for its continued democratic and free existence given the daily armed threats to the country.

Or someone who is more interested and can maybe bring down the price of eggs. 

Tinkerty Tonk...

Taiwan - The slide in morals and honesty

For a journalist, it is not the done thing to continually write about the same subject time after time, no matter how important you feel the subject is. Even if you strongly believe in something, a writer cannot just bombard their readers with the same narrative.  

Those of you who have read my previous columns about my concerns over the behavior of some Taiwanese politicians in terms of honesty and morality, you will find little new in the following paragraphs. Nevertheless, this also addresses wider issues about the forthcoming Presidential election and I feel it is worth repeating.

This is all ahead of probably the most important Presidential election Taiwan has seen since democracy was established after martial law was lifted in 1987.    

China’s daily and savage provocation with fighter jets and warships would not be tolerated by any other of the 195 countries in the world, barring parts of the Middle East and between North and South Korea. Such diabolical and open aggression means the choice of the next Taiwan President is more important than it has been since suffrage was established, otherwise democracy could disappear in Taiwan, forever. 

The heightened aggression, together with the West’s rock-solid support for Taiwan since the invasion of Ukraine, means Taiwan’s next leader has a stark decision…lean towards the West, or lean towards China. 

Not to put too fine a point on it, the choice is to keep Taiwan as it is and bolster its standing in the world, or kowtow and turn it into something akin to Hong Kong and the slippery slope that entails in terms of fading democracy and self determination. 

The slide in morals and honesty we see with politicians overseas on a regular basis seems to have normalized a pattern of behavior on a wider scale and we seem to be seeing a greater  slackening of ethical standards and integrity in Taiwan among those who aspire to lead. 

The UK’s Boris Johnson was removed from office for his shameless lies and behavior and former president Donald Trump has just been indicted for a fourth time on felony charges, this time for working to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

These situations are unprecedented and have set a new low in political behavior. My fear is local politicians are being tempted to ape such practices with the view that what is good for the goose is good for the gander. 

Corrupt practices have seem to have caught up with Anne Gao who has been released on a bail of TWD 600,000 as part of an investigation into allegations she made fraudulent payroll deductions and misused public funds.

Straightforward corruption like this is one thing but more insidious dishonesty has also crept into the Taiwan political arena with half-truths and downright lies being peddled as fact. It would all seem to be straight out of the Johnson/Trump playbook and some politicians appear to think it is acceptable behavior.

A perfect example of this is the recent assertion that all the Taiwan government’s budget figures are  fake. It’s almost exactly the same assertion made by ex-president Trump that the 2020 US election result was fixed, otherwise known as “The Big Lie.”

There has been a lack of any evidence to back up the assertion despite many investigations and recounts and it was never proved. Trump now finds himself heading for court to face trial for blatant lies that the election was stolen and his efforts to get the result overturned. 

If the current DDP government is faking the budget numbers, where is the evidence? How easy it is to say something like this to sow the seeds of doubt into voters minds and maybe swing the result.

If there is hard evidence, let’s see it. Or is your moral compass so lacking that lies trip so lightly to your lips if you see there might be some political mileage in it. 

Are we seeing those running for the presidency simply lying like Johnson and Trump to try and gain political points? Has Taiwan politics really sunk that low? The comparisons are becoming startling, and frightening. 

As Chinese general, strategist, philosopher, and writer Sun Tzu said the “wheels of justice grind slow but grind fine” and while they more quickly caught up with Boris Johnson, they are only just catching up with Donald Trump. 

The sad fact is some politicians now believe it is somehow justified to lie and deal in half-truths if it achieves the ultimate goal of power.  How can such easy liars be trusted? 

High level officials told me - really? Who? US officials told me - really? Who?  

Are politicians who indulge themselves with easy statements and don’t feel the need to provide background or evidence to be trusted? 

Can they be trusted to stick to their word over the really big issue of the future relationship with China? How can they be trusted to even come close to keeping election promises if they do win power.

British voters were sharply disappointed with Boris Johnson as a leader after his grand but now proven shallow lies. Americans corrected their 2016 blunder in 2020 by getting rid of Donald Trump and his subsequent rantings and lies about the stolen 2020 election. 

I hope and pray Taiwanese voters are not disappointed with the outcome of their election in January next year when it comes to voting in a leader who fills the role of being a statesman able to deal on the global stage at the same level as other world leaders.  

Particularly when it comes to dealing with China and Taiwan’s allies overseas. Lies or half-truths will not cut it when they are talking to those guys on your behalf.

Tinkerty Tonk...

Economics 101 -2

Despite the Cat’s best efforts translating the interview, I can’t for the life of me understand what Ko is talking about when he says Taiwan is in a Middle Income Trap. 

A Middle Income country is defined by the World Bank as one with a Gross National Income (GNI) per capita between USD1,036 and 12,535. Taiwan currently has a GNI per capita of USD33,565, slightly higher than that of South Korea. Broadly speaking both countries have been returning similar figures for years.

China apparently managed to escape the trap around 2015 and now has a GNI per capita of around USD20,000, but given the size of the economy many economists still consider this to be low enough for it to be considered to be still stuck in the trap.

Taiwan successfully escaped the middle-income trap a couple of decades ago, helped by a democratic political system, the nurturing of high-value-added technology industries, for example TSMC, and reduced levels of economic inequality.

Now, Taiwan is actually in danger of falling into a high-income trap, because of its low birth rate, a potential for greater inequality and growing political polarization.

Maybe Ko is mistaken in his terminology and means Middle Class Income which is an entirely  different thing and it has to be said that wage disparity and the income gap, particularly in terms of young people, does urgently need to be addressed.

But to say Taiwan is in a Middle Income Trap is economic nonsense. It appears Ko read it somewhere but as usual didn’t bother to read it carefully and understand it before trotting it out in this interview trying to sound like he knows what he’s talking about. 

Another Pie in the Face FAIL, I’m afraid. 

Tinkerty Tonk…

The cancer of political lies

It appears gorging on lies for political gain gives instant gratification and quickly fattens a political career, but if carried to excess leads to a bloated and ugly monster unable to move or dodge the inevitable retribution of crass and unforgivable behaviour.

Those who watch global politics will instantly know the two ex-leaders, Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, who are currently the best examples of this. 

What worries me is that others around the world, particularly wannabe leaders, are aping this appalling behaviour as an easier route to power than being honest with the electorate and decent in their behaviour within their own democratic process. 

It is a desperately depressing thought that such conduct appears to have found its way to Taiwan and is manifest ahead of what is a crucial presidential election early next year where the overriding, vitally important, beat-all topic is the relationship with China.

On this vital subject we are already seeing obfuscation, avoidance and outright lies. Which is no real surprise given the - to my mind - absurd One China Principle, the One China with respective interpretations (1992 Consensus) and the One China policy as the United States see it as a policy of strategic ambiguity regarding Taiwan.

So where are you and I? Are we caught up in a democracy with one party who apparently wants to say and pursue the unspeakable “I” word, but cannot, and a party, or parties, who clearly want to be closer to China but cannot actually say that out loud.  

To date, it would seem ‘we the people’ are stuck a cleft stick unable to decade much either way as to definite policies that might be put in place and can only guess until our final decision at the ballot box on the day. 

Most of the current political rhetoric is vague at best on the vital issue of China and there is huge room for disappointment if, for example, the next president decides to embrace China and moves away from the current status quo. 

Divide and conquer - the Latin phrase “Divide et impera” is as old as politics and war. It is  attributed to Julius Cesar and he successfully applied it to conquer Gaul (France) over two thousand years ago. It is wholly at work in Taiwan with the two more pro-China candidates happy to trot out their old and tired lines on China which is leaving many confused as to their ultimate motives should they gain power.

Does a vote for them mean a vote for a closer relationship with China? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t but at the moment everyone is having to guess because they are not brave enough to actually give solid guidance as to their intentions. They simply mouth platitudes. 

Having just watched two of the world’s leading nations fall facelong into the trap set by lying and gaslighting politicians, I would hate for Taiwan to fall into the same trap, given the repercussions are so massively life changing compared to our Trump and Johnson examples.

Boris Johnson’s lies and deceit, mainly about Brexit, certainly helped propel him to power in July 2019 but his continued lies about other issues saw him unceremoniously kicked out of office by his own party and he has since even resigned as a member of parliament because of a damning report finding him guilty of misleading the British Parliament. 

China is a huge conundrum for Taiwanese voters which is more acute, but not unlike, the choice faced by the electorate in the United Kingdom before the absurd referendum over Britain’s membership of the European Union. Sadly the British public voted to break ties with the European Union and the “Sunny Uplands” promised by Boris Johnson’s lies and they voted for him in droves. 

“Get Brexit done” was his slogan but the British people now regret leaving Europe with a poll last month showing 55 percent of Brits thought that it was wrong to leave the European Union, compared with just 34 percent who thought it was the right decision. Many complain they were lied to by Johnson and his government about the benefits of Brexit.

It would be terribly sad if Taiwanese voters end up regretting their choice of next president in the coming months and years if China is allowed more influence over their lives through a Sino-friendly administration. Then it will be too late. 

Johnson’s short-lived political career may have crashed and burned but it certainly is not as spectacular as ex-president Donald Trump’s clownish pitch for the Republican presidential nomination in November 2024. 

Mired in lawsuits ranging from mishandling state secrets to accusations he paid off a porn star, Trump’s legal woes are manifest. He is facing charges in two criminal investigations, and was ordered to pay millions of dollars to a writer after being found liable for sexual abuse.

He is also under investigation for his alleged efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat.

As ridiculous as it may seem he is still hugely popular in the United States even though he is the  first president to be indicted twice. 

A poll by ABC News and Ipsos conducted after his second indictment was consolidating more and more support from the people who believe his federal indictment was politically motivated  and is considered as the front-runner for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.

The roller-coaster of insanity and lies since Trump was kicked out of office in 2020 continues to divide America and has certainly shaken faith in the democratic process. Polls show there is little enthusiasm about the 2024 presidential front-runners and there is continued alarm about U.S. institutions.

Seven out of 10 Americans agree with the statement that American democracy is "imperilled," according to a new USA TODAY/Suffolk University poll ahead of Independence Day (July 4). 

Gaslighting, half-truths, misdirection and downright lies have damaged these once great democracies and left electorates questioning whether their political systems are severely broken and requiring major repair.

Taiwan may be tiny in comparison but its democracy is solid. The danger is that copycat politicians here see lying and misdirection as the new normal and will indulge themselves to gain political power. 

Plenty of damage and disappointment can result because the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slow and by the time lying and incompetent politicians are found out and dealt with in the proper manner, the damage has been done. Just look at the United States and the United Kingdom.

Tinkerty Tonk...

Power Sharing?

I had to set aside my usual assumption that Dr Ko is stuck together with stupid glue, when I was told he was openly saying that if he wins the Presidency he will form an all-party coalition to run the country.

Of course, I immediately had to start making assumptions again, like, he would be good to his word and do such a thing in the highly unlikely event that he wins, but let’s for a moment give him the benefit of the doubt. 

This is actually a fairly astute ploy, as there is broadly no downside but potentially a fair amount of upside in terms of attracting votes. It won’t impact the thinking of those who pay attention and take an interest in politics, who will immediately know it is nonsense, but for those who don’t it could be a vote catcher for him.

There are many people who take zero interest in politics and there is also a great swathe of the population who broadly dislike all politicians - as I do myself, quite frankly. 

For these groups, casting their ballot on the day is a chore and many just don't bother. 

For those who feel they should vote but can’t be bothered to pay close attention to dozens of promises and speeches in the run-up…voting for what they think is a coalition means they can vote for everybody at the same time..YAY. 

Their conscience is clear that they have indeed preserved democracy and voted, and a coalition means all political views will get an airing in any decision so everything will be great, right? Wrong!

A potential flaw is that if he wins, he won’t give up the power and share it with coalition partners. Ko has proved many times that he is self-centered and power hungry. 

The other, and fatal, flaw is that even if he does win he has no control over what happens in Parliament in terms of who makes up the majority, via a coalition or not. It is not up to him to decide. 

So once again, gentle reader, my initial assumption was correct that he has fallen out of a stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down.    

Nevertheless, for those who take little interest in politics, the promise of some vague notion of power sharing between the parties might throw a few votes his way that he otherwise might not have attracted. 

Tinkerty Tonk   

Deputy Denny

（中文在下方）

Good Evening Boys and Girls. Auntie Cat and Uncle Squirrel played a fun game today. Can you guess what game we played? 

That’s right, we played Spot the Oaf!

Can you also guess which one we spotted? 

Well done, right again… it was none other than the New Taipei City Mayor who the KMT have, in a somewhat distracted way, chosen as their presidential candidate for the election next year. Mind you, their field of potential choices was thinner than Terry Gou’s toupee so it was pretty much as expected.  

Our jovial coconut-headed Cop looked caszh in jeans and open-necked shirt, threw regulation police salutes to an adoring crowd looking for all the world like he was ready to charge into the next hail of bullets that happens along to save everyone from harm and do the right thing by everyone, oh, and the ROC, of course.

Strikes me, that is kind of what he always says when asked questions ranging from foreign policy to wind-farms. He will always guarantee he will do the right thing and stand up for the ROC. 

Odd how it all sounds like the oath he recited when joined up as a fresh-faced rookie cop all those decades ago. 

”I swear solemnly that I will well and truly abide by national laws and dedicate myself to serving our country; perform the duties and exercise the power by the law. I will serve the people to my best of knowledge and skill in a humble and peaceful manner.”

Although he’s obviously forgotten the “humble” bit.

Tinkerty Tonk...

Good evening boys and girls! 天花板上的貓阿姨和松鼠叔叔今天玩了一個有趣的遊戲，你能猜出我們玩的是什麼遊戲嗎？沒錯，我們玩了 Spot the Oaf！

Oaf 是什麼？A man who is rough or clumsy and unintelligent. 粗糙笨拙而且不聰明的人，我們英國人常用來形容無趣之人的一個字。

你能猜出我們發現了哪一個 oaf 嗎？又猜對了！就是國民黨在明年的總統選舉中，有點心不在焉地選擇了個參選人。不過請注意，他們的潛在選擇範圍，比泰瑞郭的假髮要薄，所以這個結果跟預期也所差無幾。

新聞照片上我們快樂的椰子頭警察，穿著牛仔褲和開領襯衫看起來很休閒，向一群崇拜者煞有介事舉手敬禮，就像他已經準備好衝進下一場槍林彈雨中，拯救每一個人讓他們免受傷害，為每一個人做正確的事，哦，當然還有為了中華民國這個國家。

讓我印象深刻的是，當被問及從外交政策到風電場的問題時，他總是這麼說，他保證他會好好做事，並為台灣挺身而出。

奇怪的是，這一切聽起來多麼像幾十年前他作為一名菜鳥警察加入時，宣誓背誦的警察人員誓言。

「余誓以至誠，恪遵國家法令，盡忠職守，報效國家；依法執行任務，行使職權；勤謹謙和，為民服務。如違誓言，願受最嚴厲之處罰，謹誓。」

雖然他顯然忘記了「 謙和」的部分。

Tinkerty Tonk... 掰掰！

Passport please - and what is the purpose of your visit?

There have been many highly educated and knowledgeable leaders throughout history with finely tuned intellects, sharp analytical skills, a deep and abiding humanity and an uncanny ability to build and achieve the best outcome for oftimes seemingly impossible situations.

These are the people whose memory endures, are revered in the history books and are rightly lauded as having benefited mankind, be it in a broad, or narrow sense.

Of course, with greatness comes ego. By definition such people have to possess self-esteem and belief in themselves to achieve great things. It is when this self-belief spills over into conceit that negatives begin to become manifest. Or when pure egotists let rip and march ahead regardless without the attendant knowledge or skills to handle a situation properly.  

Albert Einstein, certainly one of the smartest people who ever walked the earth, viewed ego as a simple equation. Ego = 1/Knowledge

Using this simple equation it’s easy to look back and know immediately where ego was, or is,  justified in our leaders.

Which is why my old British heart sank when I heard that failed, widely ridiculed, figure-of-fun and worthless Parliamentarian ex-UK Prime Minister Mary Elizabeth Truss was to visit my adopted homeland apparently to pontificate about Taiwan’s geopolitical situation.

Alongside like-minded UK politicians, I think her visit is a bad idea. Not because I don’t fully support foreign politicians, diplomats and intellectuals coming here to support Taiwan and President’s Tsai’s geopolitical stance, but because, sadly, she is just too stupid to add anything meaningful to the debate, and could, indeed, do harm. 

That may sound harsh, but it is based on fact. She recently broke the record for the shortest-serving Prime Minister in British history by serving just 45 days, beating the record by several weeks and that of someone who died in office in 1827 after 119 days. She effectively bankrupted the UK economy with ill-thought out and entirely ridiculous tax policies. 

In the British weekend papers, which held Truss as “the disgraced former prime minister” a fellow British member of parliament described her trip as a vanity project to help Truss “keep herself relevant.” Her fellow Conservative MP, Alicia Kearns went on to say the trip was “the worst kind of Instagram diplomacy” and Truss’s confrontational antics could make things worse for Taiwan. Her trip is "performative, not substantive," Kearns added.

Which takes me back to Einstein's equation. If you do the maths the ego comes out at close to infinitely large as one divided by something very tiny is close to infinity. 

Truss is not a thinker and has never shown her knowledge of global affairs as anything by trite. Her massive U-turn on Brexit is famous in the UK as she turned from once an enthusiastic backer of the UK's EU membership and voting "Remain" in the 2016 referendum and speaking out of the need to remain in the EU's single market which she described as “so precious” to undergoing a remarkable and almost instantaneous transformation into an ardent backer of Brexit when she saw it could gain her some political capital at home.

We all put up with political lightweights, generally know who they are, and the democratic process eventually weeds them out. It’s not perfect, by any means, but it’s the best process we have. There are shameless political shape-changers, Truss is one of them. 

What I object to is when the selfish motives of intellectual lightweights with massive egos and  their eye only on boosting their own political future in their own country, decide to stick their nose where it is not really wanted. Ergo UK Member of Parliament Mary Elizabeth Truss.

My heartfelt thanks to those politicians, diplomats and others who come to Taiwan with the aim of lending support and genuine help. But please, if you think just because Taiwan is a global headline story at the moment, a visit is easy and might just do your standing at home some good, stay away, please. I very much suspect, as do many others in the UK, that these are Truss’s motives with this trip.

I am certain President Tsai is smart enough not to actually share a platform with what is one of the dullest knives in the UK political kitchen, and that any meeting will be low key and not for the record. Truss is just an MP so I guess diplomatic protocol dictates a one-on-one is highly unlikely. 

The MOFA website is, of course, diplomatic in its language, welcoming her visit to “strengthen the already close and friendly ties between Taiwan and the United Kingdom.” 

The rest of the wording must have been a bit of a struggle for them as history shows her all too brief involvement in cross-strait affairs first as UK secretary of state for foreign, commonwealth and development affairs for just one year and then as Prime Minister for a flash-dance 45 days.

The poor old MOFA people had to make the right noises and they did a good job, but I would take issue with their use of Truss having ”long been” a staunch supporter of Taiwan. Given her record on policy U-turns, her cat-like ability to chase a laser pointer green dot will only last as long as a red-feather becoming more interesting and worthy of her attention.

I really hope her visit achieves something positive in the form of military aid and in Truss’s words “hard power” for Taiwan, I really do. I just somehow doubt it as she no longer has any political clout, so be prepared for disappointment, for all the above reasons. I really hope I’m proved wrong.

Taiwan needs friends, of that there is no doubt and it would be churlish and dangerous to refuse entry to anyone willing to speak out on its behalf. After all, the Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend as the old saying goes. It is just much more constructive to encourage those with real clout. 

Of course the government could not have refused permission for Truss to come but the real danger in this particular case is she may do or say something that is actually damaging to relationships with other countries which are of material help. Just look at her recent history and it is not unreasonable to describe her as a one-woman disaster zone.

I am not the only one thinking she is grabbing a selfish political opportunity by inserting herself into a story which will carry global headlines, much as other politicians have used Ukraine. 

Believe me, if the Taiwan situation was not such a global headline grabber, she would not be here. 

Of course, the cynical journalist in me might suggest having had loads of play in the British press at the weekend with some well-timed comments the Truss entourage will leave Taiwan on May 20, which just happens to be a Saturday and just in time for a huge round of weekend press briefings and interviews. 

Perhaps I misjudge her, and the now irrelevant ex-PM had no such thing in mind, but I very much doubt it. 

I would so like to be the Immigration Officer stamping her passport today... "Welcome to Taiwan, and what exactly is the  purpose of your visit?”

Tinkerty Tonk...

Realpolitik eases into Taiwan politics

The starting pistol for Taiwan’s January 2024 presidential election has been fired, with the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) declaring Vice-President William Lai as their Presidential candidate. 

The ex-Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je has declared as candidate for the four year-old Taiwan People's Party (TPP) and Terry Gou has thrown his hat in the ring to represent Kuomintang (KMT), although the party has yet to choose its official contender.

Rather than a proper war of words it has all kicked off with the more usual pussy-footing around semantics that has for so long been the hallmark of Taiwan politics.

Former Premier William Lai once said in the Legislative Yuan, "I am indeed a worker for Taiwan independence," and also "the 1992 Consensus has no consensus at all." Lai has said Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country, which obviously antagonised Beijing. 

The rage-filled government mouthpiece the Global Times criticised Lai's "extreme presumptuous attitude" and threatened to ask the Chinese government to use the "Anti-Secession Law" to issue a "global arrest warrant" against Lai.

So all the usual bluster and tub-thumping over the all too sensitive ‘I’ word but it is notable that Lai’s comments softened since. He said that it was out of respect for Zheng Nanrong, "I am indeed a worker for Taiwan independence, but compared to Mr. Zheng Nanrong, I am just a follower of Taiwan independence, and follow the ideas of our predecessors to carry out this work.”

Politicians have to be flexible in their sometimes vain efforts to keep as much of the electorate on-side as possible. A vocal pro-Independence DDP candidate may well put off voters who are worried about hard-line action from China and would not vote for a party who they see as likely to anger the mainland. On the other hand many DDP voters do not want closer ties with China and would be put off if the prospective President was too conciliatory towards our 'friends' to the West.

What we see, and have seen, in Taiwan politics is Realpolitik which is a system of politics or principles based on practical, rather than moral or ideological considerations. Realpolitik is the idea that the world is ruthless and you have to act realistically, even if it causes other things to happen that are bad, or decisions have to be made that upset your people.

Broadly speaking, it is statecraft where the pragmatic triumphs over dogma.  

The KMT is on a similar hook when it comes to the 1992 Consensus and "one China, different interpretations" In other words the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China agree that there is one China, but disagree about what "China" means.

It is a ridiculous spaghetti of meaningless words that leaves most right thinking people scratching their heads, but is deeply ingrained in the KMT’s psyche and underpins the notion both at home and abroad that the party is pro-China.  

As the KMT ponders its choice of Presidential candidate, you have to wonder if they might be considering if a dogmatic stance on the 92 Consensus might do it damage in 2024 when people head to the ballot boxes. Would a shift away be enough to convince those who do not want closer ties with China to safely vote for the KMT.

It seems KMT liberals already want to set the 92 Consensus aside but it appears not to have been popular with others in the party. That said, former KMT President Ma Ying-jeou’s recent trip to China which can only be described as fawning and servile, must be worrying campaign managers as it sends a strong, albeit unofficial, message to the voting public that the KMT is quietly but  aggressively pro-China. They don’t seem to have done much to distance themselves from Ma’s comments during the trip. 

Its campaign managers must also be concerned about the Taiwan People's Party splitting the KMT vote as it would seem the former mayor would benefit more from disaffected KMT voters than disaffected DPP voters. 

The addition of the TPP into the mix in January 2024 could throw a spanner in the works. Ko has pretty much said he is happy to play a spoiling role in Taiwan politics and, while he hasn’t said as much, would love to be the King-Maker in any coalition negotiations. 

This would not be dissimilar to the situation faced by the United Kingdom’s (UK) David Cameron in the 2010 election where a narrow victory meant he had to share power with the third largest party, the Liberal Democrats. The power sharing took the form of the Conservative/Lib-Dem coalition with Cameron as Prime Minister and Lib-Dem leader Nick Clegg as Deputy Prime Minister. 

I should hastily add that such a situation looks extremely unlikely to occur in Taiwan given current opinion polls are leaning quite heavily towards the DPP.

But as British Prime Minister Harold Wilson said in 1964 “A week is a long time in politics” and much could happen in the coming nine months. Something drastic could happen to upset the apple cart. 

One can only wonder what would happen if the KMT openly abandoned its stance on the 92 Consensus? Such an apparently dramatic move has worked in the past, most notably for Tony Blair’s Labour Party in the run up to the 1997 UK general election. 

Blair dragged the Labour party away from the left towards the centre of British politics by abandoning Clause 4 which was enshrined in the Labour Party Rule Book. It was widely seen as the Labour Party's commitment to socialism, even though the word "socialism" is not explicitly mentioned.

Blair battled within the party to rewrite Clause 4 and eventually won. It was the rebranded New Labour, and won a resounding victory at the 1997 general election, crushing the right-wing Conservatives and going on to win three more elections and an unbroken 13 years in power.  It certainly was not the only factor in the huge victory but it succeeded in making the party more electable as far as the voters were concerned. 

Blair’s brave and pragmatic move to rid himself of old left-wing party dogma that had been in the Labour Party rule book for eighty years was risky. It certainly upset many in his party and Labour voters across the land but was Realpolitik in action, and worked.

As far as Realpolitik is concerned, the DPP’s Lai emphasised there is no question of Taiwan's unification or independence, pointing out that Taiwan is already a sovereign and independent country and does not need to be independent separately. 

At this stage we can only guess whether the KMT are brave enough to consider a similar move. 

Tinkerty Tonk

Honduras Hiatus

(中文在下方)

I really don’t understand the furore over Honduras ending 82 years of diplomatic ties with Taiwan, or the other tiny counties that have done the same in the recent past.

It’s only ever been about money and when these poor countries don’t get it they just go begging elsewhere and, of course, China pays up. It’s easy to buy false friends. The rare exception is Lithuania which appears to be genuine in its relationship with Taiwan.   

My wife told me we had 11 eggs in the fridge, I disagreed and said we had 12… did we have a big row about it? No, because it makes little or no difference either way?

So Honduras has switched, so what? It is a small country with no political clout anywhere in the world, a population of less than half that of Taiwan and a nominal GDP of just $31 billion vs Taiwan’s $830 billion. Little wonder they need money and you can’t blame them for looking elsewhere. 

Taiwan should concentrate on building a deeper relationship with a friend that can actually help it, the United States. Everything else is just a distraction.

Tinkerty Tonk... 

我真的不明白宏都拉斯結束與台灣的外交關係，或近年來台灣與其他小國斷絕外交關係的紛擾。

這一直都只是錢的問題，當這些貧窮國家得不到錢時，他們就會到別處乞討，當然，中國會付出代價。假朋友很容易買到，罕見的例外是立陶宛，她與台灣的關係似乎是真誠的。

如果我家那頭常常黏在天花板上氣噗噗的貓告訴我，冰箱裡有 11 個雞蛋，我不同意並說冰箱裡有 12 個…… 我們需要為此吵架嗎？ 不會，因為 11 個或是 12 個，對我們實際上都沒有區別。

所以和宏都拉斯的關係改變了，那又如何？ 那是一個在世界任何地方都沒有政治影響力的小國，人口不到台灣的一半，名目 GDP 僅為 310 億美元，而台灣為 8300 億美元。難怪他們需要錢，而且你不能怪他們去別處找錢。

台灣應該把精力集中在真正能幫助台灣的朋友，例如美國，和他們建立更深厚的關係。其他一切，都只是枝節末微的干擾而已。

掰掰。

(祝蔡英文訪美順利！這句是我孟買春秋喬伊斯本人加的)