The Taipei Society recently submitted an "expostulation on national affairs" to President Chen Shui-bian (
Setting aside the various interpretations from the media and the opposition, the latest official response was a short article posted on "President A-bian's Electronic Newspaper" on June 27. Chen said, "Probably some administrative officials take different viewpoints on the scholars' remonstrance, but I adopt a positive view toward rational dialogue with intellectuals. Only with ideals and perseverance with reform can we continue to soul-search and make progress."
The members of the Taipei Society were happy to see that Chen could accept criticism with a positive attitude. If the administrative agencies have any misunderstanding, the Society's members would like to clarify their stance, instead of feeling exas-perated and wrongly creating obstacles to reform.
High-ranking officials should understand that the Society's frank criticisms have caused some ripples because the public does not trust "power." At a time when certain signals have indicated an inappropriateness in the government's policies and personnel arrangements, the Society's expostulation has fulfilled the function of speaking for the public at the right moment.
During the authoritarian era, people dared not speak out about the abuse of power or privilege, no matter how angry they were. In-sufficient transparency also made it possible for resource distributors to do whatever they wanted. Since the change in administra-tion, the scrutiny and pressure put on those in power has been far more intense than that placed on the previous regime. If administrative agencies fail to notice these changes and fail to strengthen internal coordination and external communication, they will end up creating various controversies and undermine people's trust in the government.
Both the Presidential Office and the Executive Yuan initially planned to hold regular press conferences. But both have cancelled their plans for unknown reasons. Is our government so afraid of communication? Its refusal to publicly explain policy backgrounds and personnel arrangements will merely increase the circulation of rumors and the damage of irresponsible criticism. It is clear from the evolution of Western systems that open information is the bedrock for gaining people's trust. If Taiwan's democratic reform fails to achieve this, the government will be suspected of wrongdoing no matter how hard it clarifies its immaculateness. Once the trust collapses, it will be extremely difficult to rebuild it.
The experience of Western democracies tell us that the flaws of a democracy can only be repaired with more democracy. The predicament facing Taiwan is that people's understanding of democracy still remains limited to the level of elections and voting, rather than expanding to all spheres of life.
The Society's expostulation states clearly at the beginning that it expects to open a public forum that rises above partisan interests and truly realizes the ideal of a "civil society." To achieve this goal, people have to engage in self-examination and try their best to overcome the conditions adverse to democratic development.
For instance, call-in shows and TV political commentary programs are filled with partisan and provocative rhetoric. Social organizations, including schools, religious groups, non-profit organizations, business enterprises and even political parties, appear to lack internal democratic mechanisms.
What's most absurd is that political parties are supposed to be the vehicles for democracy, but under the Civic Organization Law (
If the parties are not thoroughly democratized, it is extremely likely that they will have no respect for democracy, but only a blind faith in power. The lawmakers' absurd performance in the recent ratification process for presidential appointments should serve as a warning call. If the situation is not improved, distrust might spread to all kinds of relations in society and further bury all the opportunities for progress amid infighting.
The Taipei Society's remonstrance didn't just target those in power. With the diversified distribution of power in society, the Society hopes that every individual and organization will make good use of power and expand the scope of reform in a bid to instill change in politics, economics, education, law and society and thoroughly reform Taiwan. This is not just the government's responsibility but depends on everyone -- for the sake of ourselves and the next generation.
If the expostulation on national affairs is regarded as a tool for power struggle, that would be a letdown for the Society and its efforts.
Ku Chung-hwa is a professor of sociology at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing