Lien Chan stuck in the past
Chinese Nationalist Party Chair-man Lien Chan's (連戰) recent remarks emphasize the stark differences between his mindset and that of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). In England, he advocated a new "one China" policy under the Republic of China (ROC). He draws inspiration from a Tang dynasty poet who demanding personal loyalty of officials to the emperor. He eulogized Soong Mayling (蔣宋美齡), Madame Chiang, in New York by praising her efforts to "battle against totalitarianism and
oppression."
Lien's mindset seems stuck on mid-20th century China and not on present day Taiwan.
In contrast, Chen demonstrates a different perspective. His remarks during his recent trip to the Americas focused on human rights, democracy and a place for Taiwan in the international community. Taiwanese will have to decide next March whether they want a president who will lead them to a mythical nostalgic past or one who focuses on present-day, 21st century Taiwanese issues.
Kenneth Choy
Hong Kong
Vicious attack on free speech
I am a US citizen who has spent most of the past 20 years in Taiwan. I do not have the right to vote here, and do not support any local political party. How-ever, the events and images of the past few days have been so disturbing that I must speak out.
In the midst of the controversy over negative advertising and CD-ROMs featuring both pan-blue and pan-green political candidates (not to mention the excitement over Taiwan's baseball team), many people here seem to have missed a disturbing new trend: vicious and coordinated attacks on free speech, which have the potential to take Taiwan right back to 1979 and the Kaohsiung Incident.
When the pan-blue camp files a lawsuit against former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and even the actors involved in making a VCD attacking People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) and his colleagues, and when Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) threatens to sue to the DPP over a negative ad, these actions show a frightening lack of respect for free speech, however distasteful it may be.
Moreover, when a PFP legislator, accompanied by representatives of the Taipei City Gov-ernment, leads the police in a series of raids aimed at confiscating copies of said VCD, any-one who knows even a little bit about Taiwan's modern history will immediately begin to think that we have returned to the dark days of dictatorship.
Even if this VCD is in some way illegal, there are thousands of illegal and/or pirated CD-ROMs, DVDs, VCDs, etc floating around Taiwan's markets. Why confiscate just this one? The answer is obvious: because it offends the pan-blue leadership. In Taiwan, this is usually called "selectively prosecuting a case."
The fact Soong and Ma are among the leading actors in this drama is particularly ironic. Don't they remember what their enemies have so often accused them of having done during the 1970s, when Soong was in charge of the Government Information Office and any voices of opposition were being suppressed because they were in some way "illegal" or "seditious?"
In today's democratic socie-ties, political figures are frequently the targets of all manner of criticism.
When Ronald Reagan was US president, he was attacked unmercifully by left-leaning members of the entertainment industry. When former US president Bill Clinton was embroiled in the Lewinsky scandal, everyone had a field day spoofing him. Did either of these leaders sue their antagonists or order records of these attacks to be confiscated? To the best of my knowledge, no.
Today, President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are subject to incessant lampooning and lambasting. Have they tried to silence their attackers? To the best of my knowledge, no.
For a democracy to function properly, its political elites must display tolerance and patience. If one is criticized, one either ignores the attack or tries to improve; one does not muzzle the critic. The pan-blue camp seems incapable of true democratic behavior, and if the Lien-Soong ticket wins next year's presidential election, I think that we can all look forward to its leaders receiving 21-gun salutes on every tour of a township or county that they make, while any and all criticism of the new order will be ruthlessly suppressed.
In other words, we will be living in a new Orwellian age of terror, where all free speech is equal, but some free speech is more equal than others. The sacrifices of Huang Hsin-chieh (黃信介), Lin I-hsiung (林義雄) and many others who fought for Taiwan's democratization will have been in vain.
In the end, however, there is very little we foreigners can do, and that is the way it should be. The decision about who will rule this beautiful island will soon be in the hands of the Taiwanese people. It will be interesting to see the results.
Paul Katz
Taipei
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
As the highest elected official in the nation’s capital, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) is the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate-in-waiting for a presidential bid. With the exception of Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕), Chiang is the most likely KMT figure to take over the mantle of the party leadership. All the other usual suspects, from Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) to New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜) to KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) have already been rejected at the ballot box. Given such high expectations, Chiang should be demonstrating resolve, calm-headedness and political wisdom in how he faces tough
RSS