A few days ago, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
But an analysis of the paper leaves one frustrated. Given the KMT's wealth of political talent and that Ma is a Harvard law graduate, one could have expected a global perspective that measures up to international standards of governance.
So why is his white paper on Aboriginal policy superficial and short-sighted, as if Aborigines were of no importance?
Ma's policy shows no sense of integration with the international community. On Sept. 13, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which concerns all the indigenous peoples of the world, was adopted by the UN General Assembly. The fact that Ma -- more than a month later -- did not include this declaration in his white paper highlights his ignorance and indifference to Aboriginal issues, as well as his campaign team's laziness and carelessness.
Ma seems to be treating Aboriginal people as if he were still the mayor of Taipei.
At first glance, his proposal seems filled with preferential treatment, but it all turns out to be discriminatory colonialism encouraging the assimilation of Aborigines.
Many of the proposals could be implemented by the Council of Indigenous Peoples' education/culture and health departments, and many are indeed being implemented or are in the planning stages.
The white paper proposes self-determination for Aboriginal peoples, but it is a "self-determination" that is not based in self-governance. Ma wants to force Aborigines to accept the government's "good laws and good intentions." This approach has long been criticized elsewhere in the world. Furthermore, the key to Aboriginal self-determination is land -- one of the most important Aboriginal rights.
Unfortunately, the word "land" is not mentioned once in the white paper. What kind of self-determination is that without land?
The paper doesn't even clearly mention the enactment of sub-laws to the Aboriginal Basic Law (原住民基本法), the most important part of the project of codifying the rights of Aboriginal peoples.
It makes one wonder if Ma is preparing to run for president or for mayor of Taipei all over again.
In his essay "Politics as a Vocation," German economist and sociologist Max Weber suggested a distinction between politicians whose interest is more non-vocational in nature and those who pursue politics as a career.
The former are eager to seize power and selectively advocate issues that serve their own purposes. Such politicians can manipulate the public by accustoming it to pursuing short-term benefits.
Ma is committing this mistake by only proposing short-term goals -- such as building bridges and constructing roads -- to cater to Aborigines while avoiding discussion of long-term sustainable development that can safeguard the dignity and self-determination of indigenous communities.
I hope our political leaders can be "vocational politicians" and offer policies that are capable of touching the hearts of Aborigines, and who can then implement these policies step by step.
Better that than adopting short-sighted tactics to placate Aboriginal people and making "policy" suggestions that show no interest whatsoever in Aboriginal issues.
Isak Afo is a member of the Amis tribe and spokesperson of the Taiwan Indigenous Association.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath