Cheng Chung-mo's (
At least that is the sincere hope of those of us who are getting worn down by the around-the-clock sensational media coverage of the story. However, among all the gossip and hearsay disguised by the media as "serious news" in this latest saga, there has been insufficient discussion of why Cheng should step down.
If the real justification for demanding Cheng's resignation isn't stressed, the point of his departure would seem to be lost in the tide of useless information the media is feeding the public about the story.
Without question, Cheng's decision to step down was the right one and absolutely necessary. When the local Chinese-language media initially published pictures of him entering the motel with a young woman, if he had immediately declared his decision to resign, it would have been the correct choice. Waiting a few days before finally succumbing to public pressure diminishes Cheng's standing.
Cheng had to resign because he had tarnished the credibility and the image of the Counsel of Grand Justices, as well as the Judicial Yuan vice. Had he remained in his posts, the tasteless jokes and speculation would have lingered on, diminishing the image of the institutions. The damage to the trustworthiness of these two institutions, which are supposed to be embodiments of law and justice, would be too great.
Even if Cheng was telling the truth, and that the woman was indeed suffering a stomach ache and needed to use the bathroom of the motel, he should still resign. Entering a motel room with a young woman alone by itself is highly improper precisely because it raises too much speculation about the real reason behind the act.
Having said that, it should be pointed out that there were no real legal grounds to ask Cheng to resign. Entering a motel room with a woman is not illegal and nothing else can be proved to have happened. In the absence of legal reasons, Cheng's resignation was a moral and ethical issue -- that is, he had sufficient conscience to save the Council of Grand Justices and the Judicial Yuan vice from further public mockery. Chen's resignation was an act of self-sacrifice in this regard. From a member of the Council of Grand Justices, people rightfully demand higher moral and ethical standards.
Cheng's resignation should end the controversy. He and the woman in question should be left alone. Whatever their relationship, it is strictly private and a personal matter of the parties involved.
Unfortunately, there are some members of the Legislative Yuan who seem to be having far too much fun with the whole issue and don't want it to end too soon. Some of them are even saying that there should be an investigation into whether Cheng told the truth and into the exact nature of the relationship between Cheng and the woman. That would be taking things too far. One cannot help but ask why the Legislative Yuan does not demand of itself half of what it demands from Cheng.
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with