Over the weekend, pirate radio stations in southern Taiwan reportedly aired malicious remarks aimed at Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
There is no proof so far that the threatening remarks were made, with an initial report by the Cabinet-level National Communications Commission (NCC) indicating that the words "to assassinate" or "to kill" were not heard on the programs. But KMT legislators were quick to jump to their feet to lambaste the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration for "permissively allowing death threats under the pretense of freedom of expression."
The pro-China media has been eager to play up the unverified reports, running them on the hour for the past few days. The issue of Ma's safety is suddenly the nation's top concern, while callers to underground radio stations -- who are usually known for their pro-independence stance -- are in the meantime being described as "barbaric" people who "opt for the use of violence." The pan-blues are trying to paint all callers to pirate radio stations with the same brush, despite lacking any substantiated information on when the death threats were made and on what channel.
The pan-blues demanded that Premier Su Tseng-chang (
The Kaohsiung Prosecutors' office was quick to respond, launching an investigation on Tuesday into the matter. The NCC said that it would move to assist the police in investigating the alleged calls to "assassinate" Ma.
The use of violence is unacceptable. And yes, it is important to take precautions against any rhetoric that might be turned into action and endanger the security and well-being of the nation's leaders. But what about the brazen, violent rhetoric from Ma himself? Unlike the unsubstantiated rumors of threats on underground radio stations, Ma's comments were aired for all to see on the nation's TV news stations. Apparently, to the country's pro-China media and some of the nation's prosecutors, some lives are more valuable than others.
Why didn't prosecutors express concern when Ma, while noting earlier this month that the opposition would only get one shot at recalling the president, brazenly incited the public by saying: "It's time to load the gun, but not yet time to pull the trigger"? Why hasn't the media been more critical after Ma on Wednesday urged Chen to take the initiative to resign instead of being recalled, warning him that he would "die a horrible death" if he didn't do so?
And NCC members have seemingly fallen asleep and missed the far more violent words such as "execute A-bian" and "kill [former president] Lee Teng-hui (李登輝)" which are often yelled in public by pro-unification diehards, posted on the People First Party's online forum and aired on a certain TVBS talk show program.
It appears that the only relevant difference here is the color of one's political affiliation.
A day after charges were filed against him by a group of DPP Tainan City councilors for "inciting others to kill," Ma yesterday offered an apology for his violent remarks.
The nation's pro-China media will hopefully put aside their partisan sentiments and stop applying double standards to the pan-green and pan-blue camps. Ma, as leader of the nation's largest opposition party, should set a good example, instead of adding to the nation's bitter political atmosphere. What the country needs now is less hatred and more rationality.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS