Club crackdown an affront
In the early hours of Saturday morning, Taipei's beleaguered police force carried out a three-hour crackdown on a popular local dance club that sent the activist reforms of the Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (
A contingent of armed police officers raided a primarily gay club called Texound at around 2:30am, shutting down the music and forcing nearly 1,000 people to kneel on the ground, their hands in the air, for 30 minutes. One police officer told the kneeling crowd that any drugs found near them would be considered theirs -- this despite international precedents that would invalidate any such finding in a court of law.
Though I am supportive of police efforts to crack down on drug use in Taipei, I believe their totalitarian methods invalidate the law they are meant to protect. The police officers in question -- and the mayor whom they represented -- owe nearly 1,000 people an apology. Police officers were uncooperative with people there. They refused to give any timeline on how long the police would raid. They would not allow people to use the bathroom.
And, probably most troubling, they refused to allow people who had left their keys or other personal things in club lockers to retrieve them. Taipei should reimburse the club-goers that took cabs -- and pay for the hours that people were forced to wait outside in chilly, drizzly weather.
I'm particularly troubled by the police force's raid of a gay club just hours after a landmark rally that may make Taiwan one of the world's most gay-friendly -- at least in principle -- countries. Police raids that target gay clubs when other equally-notorious clubs are left alone should send a warning signal that the activist reforms pushed by Taiwanese politicians are dead in the water.
This is not my first run-in with police in Taiwan, only the worst. This was the third time I have been in a gay establishment that was raided by the police. I encourage Ma to issue a blanket apology to the people who paid to have a good night and were instead manhandled by police. The city should reconsider reimbursing people for cutting short a night that was meant to be celebratory but ended up being spent kneeling on a dirty floor, hands on their knees.
Eric Lee
Taipei
Ma will stew in his own juice
Last Wednesday, the DPP-led Cabinet approved a draft referendum law, which predominantly aims to expand the scope of direct democracy. Such an establishment can be translated as a triumph in democracy by a nation.
However, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Vice Chairman, and Taipei mayor, Ma Ying-jeou (
Ma was also quoted as saying, "What's not written in the Constitution is not permissible."
Despite holding a doctorate in law, Ma somehow failed to remember that the very nature of the laws is adapting the rules to the status quo, rather than living by the same code year in and year out. The best way to interpret the laws, particularly the Constitution, should be the exact opposite of what Ma said. What is not restricted in the Constitution should be possibly permissible.
The laws have their own multipurpose mechanisms in order to serve many means, as long as those means fit into the interests of the people. Furthermore, the incumbent DPP has no need to listen to Ma, since Ma was contradicting himself as a member of the KMT. Back in 1948, it was the leaders of the KMT that activated Martial Law and bypassed the Constitution, hurting the interests of the people.
As we know, to renounce people's rights to speak, to act and to participate in politics is to deny them the very thing that makes us a democratic country. Now Ma is harking back to that earlier era, stemming the tide of democracy just like Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) did half a century ago. It's a mystery what Ma is thinking. Could his words mean that he has other fish to fry and is using this debate as a tactical maneuver? Nonetheless, for years Ma has always learned what it takes to get ahead. But now it seems that he is likely to stew in his own juice.
Iap Hong-sum
Taipei
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