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.
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.