Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te delivered the first National Day address of his presidency today.
Lai’s speech was much discussed ahead of time. There has been the perception among some international observers that Lai broke from his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen, in his inauguration speech by shifting away from a pro-status quo position and toward a more pro-independence stance. The Lai administration denies this, and has publicly emphasized that its position does not differ from Tsai’s.
National Day this year takes place in a context in which partisan gridlock continues to characterize Taiwanese domestic politics. The Kuomintang (KMT) and its ally, the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), have dug in their heels against passing the national budget for next year, blocking the budget as a whole – including the military budget, in which Taiwan’s domestic submarine program has become a particular target of ire.
Similarly, to take advantage of its current majority in the legislature, the KMT appears to be intent on continuing with moves aimed at expanding legislative powers and undercutting the power of the executive and judicial branches of government. The KMT continues to advance a controversial proposal that critics say would effectively freeze Taiwan’s Constitutional Court from making rulings.
For the first time since 2015, this year’s National Day celebrations were organized under the auspices of the KMT, as the president of the Legislative Yuan takes responsibility for National Day. Because of the KMT’s majority, this is currently former Kaohsiung mayor and KMT 2020 presidential candidate Han Kuo-yu.
In comments ahead of the celebrations, Han stated that the National Day celebrations this year would restore the Republic of China (ROC) to its rightful place. The KMT has increasingly leaned into the narrative that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has denigrated institutions of the ROC in past years. In a colorful metaphor, Han compared the ROC to a “dark and thin old man” who “had been locked up in a black hut for the last ten years.”
The DPP had historically viewed the ROC as anathema, viewing it as a colonial imposition that the KMT brought with it to Taiwan after its retreat following the Chinese Civil War. But Tsai Ing-wen pushed the DPP toward the position that Taiwan was already a sovereign and independent country by the name of “the Republic of China (Taiwan),” with no need to declare independence as doing so would likely provoke retaliation from China. This was a large shift for the DPP. With Tsai and the DPP’s unexpected embrace of the ROC, the KMT has been at odds to emphasize that the ROC it is loyal to differs from the “ROC (Taiwan)” referred to by the DPP.
A speech by Lai last week, during a concert organized for National Day, further upped the ante. In spite of his claims to have the same political position as Tsai at present, Lai is dogged by his record of pro-independence statements as Tainan mayor, in referring to himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwanese independence.” But Lai took the opposite tack in emphasizing that the People’s Republic of China was not the mother country of the ROC, seeing as the ROC is actually historically older than the PRC – the PRC celebrated its 75th anniversary this month, while the ROC celebrated its 113th anniversary.
Some of the differences regarding National Day celebrations this year likely stem from the fact that the KMT took a larger role in organizing it. In the performances that preceded Lai’s National Day speech, there was comparatively less emphasis on Taiwan’s cultural pluralism in terms of the use of different languages (Indigenous, Hakka, and Taiwanese Hokkien) or highlighting Southeast Asian migrants to Taiwan.
In comments that immediately preceded Lai’s address, Han claimed that Chinese cultural values were at the heart of the nation and defended the controversial powers sought by the KMT legislative caucus, claiming that they would make Taiwan more democratic and transparent. Han also reiterated the importance of overseas compatriots, a traditional plank of the KMT. But the overseas compatriot representative who spoke, Taiwanese Association of America president Chen Gui-ling, struck a seemingly opposite note to Han in her comments. She referred to the importance of Taiwan as part of the First Island Chain, and criticized China for its bullying of Taiwan on the international stage, such as at the Paris Olympics.
Lai’s comments retread old ground with regards to domestic policy. He said that he would aim to assist young people with tuition, try to ensure that they were able to purchase homes, and ensure that the social safety net was in place for Taiwan’s rising elderly population. Lai stated that his administration would strive to ensure stronger transportation and economic links between different regions of Taiwan.
Lai also emphasized defense and boosting social resilience against natural disasters. These two policy initiatives seem to be related for Lai, in that Whole-of-Society resilience has sometimes used a civilian frame for defense-minded efforts. Whole-of-Society initiatives are framed as being useful for disaster relief from typhoons and earthquakes and, in this sense, a net positive for Taiwan irrespective of the odds of war with China.
Likewise, Lai praised young people who have put Taiwan on the international stage – such as RuPaul’s Drag Race winner Nymphia Wind and Olympics gold medalist Lin Yu-ting – as the pride of the nation. This, too, has been a recurring theme of the Lai administration.
There were two aspects of Lai’s comments that were more surprising. First, Lai offered a new historical narrative to justify how the DPP had come to embrace the ROC, suggesting that the ROC had been founded 113 years ago by individuals who hoped to establish a more just, democratic polity. Lai connected this to the struggle for democracy by the DPP’s founders during Taiwan’s authoritarian period, to suggest that they had shared ideals. He drew a line of continuity between the ROC’s founding and Taiwan’s democratization: “Over more than a century, the people’s desire to master their own destiny has finally been fulfilled.”
In casting the founders of the ROC as fighting against an “imperial regime,” Lai may also have been implying a parallel to Taiwan’s contestation with contemporary China.
Second, Lai suggested that the door was open for Taiwan and China to cooperate on issues such as climate change and pandemic prevention. Lai noted that China had benefited in the past from the international community welcoming it into the international economic order and argued that China could “return” to becoming a responsible stakeholder by helping resolve the Russia-Ukraine war or conflicts in the Middle East.
Lai was likely attempting to accomplish a number of aims with these comments. For one, as with last week’s statement, Lai may have intended to highlight the KMT’s contorted position on the ROC. But Lai also probably sought to take the high moral ground, in casting himself and the DPP as willing to outreach and compromise, while the KMT is not.
The same could be said regarding China. Lai and his administration likely do not have any expectation of China taking him up on his offer of cooperation, but they aim to take the high moral ground by casting themselves as willing to seek dialogue in a way China is not.
It remains to be seen how Lai’s comments are received by the Chinese government and the KMT. While DPP former presidents Chen Shui-bian and Tsai Ing-wen were in attendance, former president Ma Ying-jeou of the KMT did not attend. In a statement on Facebook, Ma asserted that Lai’s views on the relationship of Taiwan and China were equivalent to a two-state theory, terming Lai a troublemaker. He cited English-language publications that had taken the view that Lai’s policies differ from Tsai’s to back this claim. Ma’s stance may be eventually echoed by the KMT as a whole.
Moreover, shortly before National Day, Reuters, citing unnamed sources in the Taiwanese national security establishment, reported that China was likely to launch drills around Taiwan after Lai’s speech – with the implication being that this would take place regardless of what Lai actually said. Though the Chinese government has to date called Lai’s speech “old wine in a new bottle,” it is to be seen if they will react with military threats to his comments, framing them as having crossed its red line.