When political ideologies are at the center of a debate on the preservation of a monument, a structure less than three decades old can carry the misleading status of a heritage site worthy of protection.
Such absurdity was in full display on Tuesday when the Taipei City Government's Department of Cultural Affairs announced that it would start the process of deciding whether or not the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall should have the protection afforded an historical site.
The abrupt announcement came soon after the Cabinet's decision that the hall would be renamed "Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall" and the white and blue walls surrounding it demolished.
The urgency of the statement shows the degree of political will the Taipei City Government can demonstrate when trying to protect a structure that was built in 1980.
Since the Cabinet announced its plan last Friday, the city government has left no law in its jurisdiction unturned to save the memorial and its environs. In order to guarantee that the hatchet man of the 228 Incident remains majestically enshrined, the Department of Cultural Affairs first cited the Construction Law (
If this law can be applied to a structure that is younger than Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, then why did the Taipei City Government insist upon tearing down the Jiancheng Circle (
And some sites on the city government's demolition list are older than that. The government has approved tearing down walls surrounding Talungtung's (
And it is chillingly ironic that the very day the city government made an announcement declaring the CKS Memorial Hall a temporary heritage site, the Department of Rapid Transit Systems issued a notice to the Lo Sheng Sanatorium (
Glancing at the list of enduring landmarks chosen to be destroyed by the city government, it's hard not to notice the stench of cultural prejudice in the air.
Cherry-picking history so that Chiang Kai-shek (
Meanwhile, the birth of democracy in this country remains substantially unmemorialized.
Lee Yong-ping (
If her argument is valid, would it then be acceptable for the Taipei City Government to preserve the walls while letting Chiang's symbolic credibility expire? Probably not.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS