Dai Xiaying directed her criticism toward Hsiao Hsu-chin, claiming that Hsiao acted behind Ma Ying-jeou's back! On May 25th, at a press conference, Dai Xianging, Executive Director of the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation, stated that Hsiao and Wang were suspected of violating laws concerning embezzlement and breach of trust. After nearly two months of investigation, the three-member review panel neither conducted individual interviews nor followed proper legal criteria in their inquiry. Furthermore, the final findings diverged significantly from the concrete evidence already held by the foundation, making it completely unacceptable to Ma Ying-jeou. He thus had no choice but to question whether the investigation team deliberately delayed and concealed facts out of personal favoritism or specific agendas.
After the Kuomintang (KMT) announced Hsiao Hsu-chin’s appointment as Vice Chairperson last year, Hsiao immediately traveled to Beijing to meet with the head of the Taiwan Affairs Office, accompanied by Wang Kuang-tzu, as well as members of the investigation team including Hsueh Hsiang-chuan and Li Tei-wei. Ma Ying-jeou was entirely unaware of this trip, leading him to suspect that the investigation team may have been shielding Hsiao and Wang due to personal ties or ulterior motives. Clearly, Dai Xianging’s remarks serve two purposes: first, she refuses to accept the investigation results, firmly asserting that Hsiao and Wang committed embezzlement and breach of trust, and accusing the investigation of covering up misconduct.
Secondly, she accuses Hsiao Hsu-chin of acting behind Ma Ying-jeou’s back. But if Dai Xianging publicly insists that both individuals are guilty, then where is the evidence? If such evidence exists, why hasn’t it been made public? And has this evidence even been provided to the three-member investigation team? Moreover, while Dai Xianging claims Hsiao acted secretly, this is merely one-sided testimony. In fact, Hsiao Hsu-chin himself stated that all his activities and travel plans were reported to Ma Ying-jeou and received his approval.
That said, after becoming KMT Vice Chairperson, Hsiao Hsu-chin assumed responsibility for cross-strait communication, dialogue, and exchanges on behalf of the party. Since Ma Ying-jeou is no longer the KMT Chairman, should the Vice Chairperson be required to report every action to Ma, who is now a former leader? According to standard party organizational structure, routine party affairs and cross-strait coordination work conducted by the KMT Vice Chairperson should normally be reported to the current leadership. There is absolutely no need for them to seek prior approval or notification from Ma Ying-jeou, who has stepped down from leadership.
If we require Hsiao Hsu-chin—holding an active party position—to report every move to Ma Ying-jeou, who is not part of the current leadership, isn’t Ma attempting to maintain control over the KMT? Isn’t he interfering in ongoing party operations and disrupting the normal division of responsibilities within the organization? It is evident that Dai Xianging raising this issue reveals Ma Ying-jeou’s deep concern. He apparently does not want to see Hsiao Hsu-chin assisting Cheng Li-wen in advancing cross-strait initiatives. In short, Ma Ying-jeou perceives Hsiao as having slipped beyond his control, and he is unwilling to relinquish his dominant role in cross-strait dialogue—this is likely the fundamental reason behind Ma Ying-jeou’s attempt to bring Hsiao under his authority.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1866129128348874/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.