"Taiwan has plenty of rumors, but no evidence" is the impression of many people at present. Ever since the nation's first transfer of power took place in 2000 many people and institutions -- from party leaders and legislators to the media and academics -- have repeatedly abused their freedom of speech. Irresponsible attacks have been made in words and in writing, without any evidence to back up the accusations. As a result, the honesty, credibility and morality of Taiwan's politicians have been repeatedly questioned, while the dignity of our judicial system has also been knocked to the ground.
After the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost the 2000 election, former New Party legislator Hsieh
Chi-ta (
More recent examples include: Independent Legislator Sisy Chen (
But it is not always the president who is the target of such nonsense. For example, independent Legislator Su Ying-kuei (
One thing that all these accusations have in common is that no evidence has been produced to substantiate any of the claims. Some of the people involved have already changed their stories in the face of media questions. But even when the accusers are shown to have been confused about their information, they have stoutly refused to admit to any error or to apologize to their victims.
Such accusations should not be made without a thorough investigation beforehand. It is hard to believe that politicians and academics have so little regard for the public that they expect to be able to bamboozle them for political rewards. The history of Taiwan's elections shows that voters see perfectly clearly, and that politicians and political parties that cannot be trusted will eventually be rejected by the people.
It is time to hold people accountable for what they say. When irresponsible claims are made, reporters and voters alike should be quick to demand accountability. People and institutions should not be able to hide their lies behind the protection afforded by the right of free speech. If such accountability is not forthcoming, the people should use their votes to throw out these irresponsible politicians and the candidates supported by grandstanding academics who appear to have lost any sense of moral compass.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS