Amid fuss over the Kaohsiung mayoral court case and the deliberations of the Central Election Commission on referendum protocol, one item of electoral news slipped by this week with barely a sound.
The Council of Indigenous Peoples has been lobbying, with limited success, for the implementation of autonomy laws that would allow Aborigines to take more control in their homelands.
In a boost for the council, and in the wake of the UN finally completing its declaration on indigenous rights, the Cabinet this week signed off on an autonomy bill that would redesignate Aboriginal territory as county-level administrative areas, a development with potentially far-reaching effects on the environment, the water supply, tourism, ethnic relations (thousands of non-Aborigines reside legally in these areas) and other matters of national importance.
This development caps off a largely suppressed campaign that started in the 1940s, when a number of Aboriginal activists advocated a single county-level district for their communities. Sadly, they were tortured and executed by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government for, among other things, having the temerity to believe the promise of equality in the Constitution of the Republic of China.
Today, every Aboriginal township belongs to a county with a majority Han population. And although Aboriginal townships enjoy representation in county councils, they simply do not have the numbers to effect changes -- especially those that could irritate the Han majority or vested interests -- or to express the diversity of opinion in Aboriginal Taiwan.
The Cabinet bill could change all that, though the formation of a new county or counties would require lengthy negotiation with county governments. Indeed, it is difficult to envisage a situation in which any county government would willingly cede most of its mountainous territory to a pan-ethnic enclave.
The real question is what the legislature will do with this bill. On paper, Aboriginal activists might express optimism at its prospects given that the KMT enjoys solid support from every one of Taiwan's ethnic minorities, Aboriginal or not. Unfortunately for them, the reality is harsher than it appears.
Before the legislature was downsized, eight seats were reserved for Aboriginal legislators -- four from "mountain" areas and four from "plains" areas. In addition, political parties tended to add Aboriginal candidates to legislator-at-large lists to appear ethnically diverse. Dramatic over-representation of Aborigines in proportional terms was the result.
With the halving of the legislature, the number of reserved Aboriginal seats dropped from eight to six, which only enhanced Aboriginal over-representation. But the most notable thing was what did not change: the discredited single-vote, multiple-member system.
The legislature elected not to make Aboriginal people vote for a sole legislator in one of six districts, a decision that benefits incumbent Aboriginal legislators. It is unclear why Aboriginal people were considered unfit for the new system, but it can be assumed that the KMT wanted to keep its existing Aboriginal legislators on side, and that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wanted to retain a system that gives them a faint hope of slipping a DPP Aboriginal representative into the legislature.
This is a perfect example of vested interests of political parties and self-aggrandizing Aboriginal politicians defeating the interests of Aboriginal people in general. It is difficult to imagine that such a legislature will deal with Aboriginal autonomy in a manner befitting the people it is meant to benefit.
The legislature is thus likely to enact a watered-down law that will leave Aboriginal communities at the mercy of mining companies, the Forestry Bureau, the national parks administration, county governments and other agencies with a serious budget.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations