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...