The Kaohsiung City Council has become a laughing stock. It is the first local council in Taiwan to have no one to preside over its meetings, which are set to begin by the end of this month. Both its speaker and vice speaker, as well as many of the councilors, have been detained on vote-buying charges stemming from last year's council elections. On Wednesday, the Kaohsiung District Court sentenced Kaohsiung City Council Speaker Chu An-hsiung (朱安雄) to 22 months in prison for vote-buying. Chu is also suspected of embezzling a massive amount of funds from his own companies and is facing a breach of trust trial over that matter. The whole country and international democracy NGOs are watching what Kaohsiung will do next.
By law, the council can still recommend and elect a chairman among themselves to preside over its meetings. This will keep the council up and running. But even if the council does carry on with its meetings, what is the point of doing so if the council has lost the trust of its constituents? Embarrassing as it may seem, the council's predicament provides an opportunity for Taiwan to reflect on its level of democratization.
Kaohsiung City can wait quietly for the judicial process to finish, but that is going to take a long time, perhaps even beyond the end of the current council's term. Unless the court finds them innocent and thereby clears their names, the councilors will have to wear the label of corruption all the way to the end of their terms. They will not be able to raise their heads in pride when in the presence of their constituents. This will be an agonizing process for both the councilors and the city's residents.
If the judicial process drags on, the political process simply won't be feasible. According to existing laws, neither the speaker nor the vice speaker can be recalled until one year into their terms. They are therefore under legal protection now and cannot be removed. To avoid the taint of corruption, the ruling and opposition parties have expelled all their councilors who had been implicated in the vote-buying scandal. Now the council is in a party-less, anarchic state, with independent councilors comprising a vast majority. No party is in a position to control the councilors. The council is like a kite whose string has snapped, a kite drifting in the wind which no one can catch. Facing the imminent council meetings, the city government can find no party caucus with which to negotiate. City government officials can do nothing except brace themselves for the chaos.
The Kaohsiung City Council has created a difficult question for Taiwan's democracy. When neither legal nor political means can resolve the council's situation, one choice is to play along with the mess by letting the council convene and continue to operate. But this is like sawing off the rear part of an arrow that has hit you. The part of the arrow stuck in your body will continue to cause you unbearable pain. Democracy may be able to limp along in this way, but everyone will feel frustrated and no one will have dignity.
Extraordinary means should be used to tackle this unprecedented situation. It's best if the Legislative Yuan speed up the review and passage of the proposed referendum bill. Kaoshiung City residents should take it upon themselves to launch a no-confidence signature drive against the council and push for a full by-election so that this prickly problem can be thoroughly resolved. If we can turn Kaohsiung's crisis into an opportunity and push for a referendum law, we will also be issuing a stern warning to local politicians and aspiring politicians, which is still fraught with corruption and vote-buying. The people of Kaohsiung City will then be able to raise their heads and say that their city is not a failure in democracy.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers