The recent spate of revelations about the government's corrupt practices has kicked up quite a fuss. Independent Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) has disclosed information provided by someone the media has unimaginatively dubbed "Deep Throat." The reports have been so sensational that even President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has admitted that law enforcement officials may have leaked state secrets to opposition legislators.
Such a "culture of disclosure" began in the 1980s when the dangwai (outside the Chinese Nationalist Party [KMT]) movement was in full swing. It was the exposure of government scandals that catapulted the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to power. Moreover, these disclosures, whether true or false, appeared in publications supporting the dangwai movement and were used as ammunition to attack the KMT government.
In other words, there used to be people within the KMT who could not stand the party's misconduct and corruption -- or who were involved in factional power struggles -- who leaked information for political gain. This helped dangwai activists in their fight against the KMT regime, which had a monopoly on the country's administrative resources.
Many people who made a name for themselves using this information against the KMT government now hold important government posts. Chen, for example, excelled in exposing the failings of the Ministry of the National Defense. However, they have not welcomed similar treatment by the pan-blue opposition and have gone so far as to label these people as a "source of social chaos." But under the KMT, Chen often relied on leaked information, and was regarded by journalists as one of the most effective legislators. These accolades for his performance were instrumental in getting him where he is today.
Of course, if legislators repeatedly make false accusations, they will quickly become the subject of public ridicule. And when the facts finally emerge, public opinion will back the victims at the ballot box.
Members of the DPP need only think back to the days of martial law. At that time, activists and politicians were constantly being slandered and attacked by the media. But they were not defeated. Now they have the advantage of having the government behind them, so there is no reason why they should criticize others for publicizing information about government corruption.
Social unrest is not caused by groundless accusations in the legislature. It comes about when these accusations are based on fact and reveal actual corruption within the government.
What is most regrettable about the whole situation is that ever since the Kaohsiung MRT labor brokerage scandal was made public, former Presidential Office deputy secretary-general Chen Che-nan (陳哲男) has been shown to have repeatedly lied to the public. It is this that has led to disillusionment with the DPP. We need to remember that this whole scandal was prompted by the "exposure" of information, not as a result of a government probe.
What the Taiwanese people want is an honest and transparent government that protects their rights and interests. They want a government that understands that if it has done wrong, it should right those wrongs. Such a government would not fear exposure.
In the current situation, the sharp difference in political ideology between the pan-green government and pan-blue public servants means that some government workers are eager to leak information about the government to the media or to pan-blue legislators.
This is hardly surprising, and in fact it can be regarded as a check on the government. As to the good or bad that has been done by Taiwan's "Deep Throat," we should let history be the judge, rather than rushing to condemn any individual.
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