Print

Mail

wiki links

Who do the blues serve?

If one report is correct, 70 percent of Taiwanese people support the arms procurement bill, but the bill is continually obstructed by pan-blue camp legislators (Time running out on arms bill, May 24, page 8).

The Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) should initiate a grass roots protest against every legislator who opposes the bill at their offices and even at their homes. Start with the pan-blue procedure committee members, who won't even let the bill make it to the legislative floor.

In southern Taiwan, where Taiwanese consciousness is strong, a grass roots "revolution" is needed to let these legislators know who they are supposed to be representing. It is the people they represent, not the party, not their chairmen. They are paid by the people, not their party. They must serve the people, not their party.

For blue camp legislators, particularly the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), their legislative seats might be bought with illegitimate party assets. But they still have to be elected by the people. For the next three years, probably the only way to pressure these legislators is to let them know who their masters are. It is the people, not the KMT, not the People First Party (PFP), not KMT Chairman Lien Chan (連戰), not PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) -- and certainly not Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) or China.

Chen Ming-chung

Chicago, Illinois

US weapons not good enough

Your editorial "Time running out on arms bill" (May 24, page 8) ignores a significant function, as well as a responsibility, of the legislature. Its role is one of oversight. It's not deniable that the conflict between major political parties in Taiwan are so acute that the interests of these parties are inevitably involved in legislative process and influence the passage of bills.

However, the pan-blue camp plays the crucial role of overseeing the government, in this case on national security issues. As national security is a priority that surmounts political considerations, the blue-camp realizes that the arms bill does little to improve Taiwan's defenses, but rather, burns the taxpayers' money like oil.

Therefore, characterizing their obstruction of the arms bill as a continuation of the competition between parties or an emotional boycott against the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government is a misinterpretation of their role in the legislature.

What should be passed in the legislature must be the best policies that have endured a cost-benefit analysis. Even if the arms bill is passed today, these weapons will not arrive or be ready for operation for months or years. While the military expenditure of China is rising each year, Taiwan cannot afford either to engage in an arms race, or waste money on improper military procurement.

To sum up, what the overseeing side concerns itself with is quality. We do need to buy weaponry, but what we need is weapons that are able to make a great contribution to our defense.

Tzung Han Lu
Taipei
This story has been viewed 1950 times.