To demonstrate their determination to curb crime and eradicate "black gold," Minister of Interior Yu Cheng-hsien (
It is interesting just how very specific these targets were. Yu proposed to accomplish "zero growth in the crime rate" within three months; Chen proposed to prosecute at least 50 corruption cases, conduct 10,000 searches and prosecute 1,000 drug-use cases within three months. If these goals are not reached, both vowed to make themselves accountable and resign.
This brings to memory Lin Yang-kang's (林洋港) boasting during his term as minister of the interior. He promised he would bring an end to the metal cages people put on their windows for safety. His statement made him the laughing stock of the nation.
The crime rate consistently has been a key issue for Taiwanese voters. Therefore, public pressure is elevated when it comes to crime control.
Is there a crime problem in Taiwan? The answer differs, depending on whether crime statistics or public perception are used as the criteria. Sometimes statistics released by the government are very impressive, but the public may still feel uneasy. To the government, rating the crime problem is based on the fluctuation of objective statistics. To the people, it is based on a subjective sense of security that is influenced by the crime stories they see in the media.
When Chen Chin-hsing (陳進興) was a fugitive, he committed crimes at will and wherever he pleased, creating a great sense of helplessness. Although the government tried to prove -- based on statistics -- that there was no worsening of crime problem, Lien Chan (連戰) still had to resign as premier due to public pressure.
Here are a things Yu and Chen may wish to consider:
First, crime-fighting requires good management skills, rather than hot-headedness that can lead to taking action blindly. It needs to be done regularly and systematically. It is not a three-month endeavor, but a measured application of pressure. Obviously, crime can never be completely eradicated, but it can be controlled to a certain degree.
Second, statistics can be deceiving. It is the duty of law-enforcement agencies to fight crime. But setting specific arrest targets and having three-month crackdowns can only push them to deliberately stall ongoing investigations until it is time to show progress. To meet targets, they can just decrease the number of cases they cover up.
Third, crime control should not be used as an election-year vote-getter. After all, it would make policy implementation unnecessarily complicated for police on the streets. Once the opposition parties join the circus, then another boxing match between the opposition and the ruling camp ensues.
If the crime rate of Taiwan can be curbed within a short period time, that would be good. But the focus of crime-fighting should still be strategies and procedure implementation. The Cabinet need not take credit for dips in the crime rate, because the fight against crime is a never-ending war, rather than a short-term crackdown. As long as serious and long-term efforts are made, the people will naturally begin to sense gradual improvement.
Finally, recall that relying on law enforcement to fight crimes is only dealing with the symptoms. To heal the illness, improvements in people's lives and education level are still the best way to long-term health.
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath