The recent absurdities repeatedly enacted by Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) cannot but remind us of Hau's father, the fierce four-star general and former premier, Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村), who declared several times with great agitation in the legislature that the national army would not defend Taiwanese independence.
When former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) appointed Hau Pei-tsun premier in 1990, the move was widely questioned and led to the formation of a movement opposing political intervention by military officials. Doubts were confirmed the following year when the Investigation Bureau secretly arrested four individuals, thus setting off the ensuing Association for Taiwanese Independence (獨立台灣會) Incident. The incident incited public outrage that forced Hau Pei-tsun to release the four detainees.
The endless farces put on by Hau Lung-bin, who has aided and abetted his father, alerts Taipei citizens to the possibility of the reemergence of authoritarianism in the vein of the elder Hau's declaration that the national army would not protect Taiwanese independence. Mayor Hau's forceful opposition to the Central Election Commission's decision on one-step voting and his insistence on using two-step voting in Taipei is a blatant violation of central government policy.
The purpose of his defiance is to sabotage the referendum. Referendums are direct realizations of the public will -- don't Hau's actions stand in opposition to direct public power? Isn't the city government's repeated attempts to obstruct the Ministry of Education from removing of the dazhong zhizheng (大中至正) plaque from the gate of the National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall a concealed defense of the authoritarian values that the inscription, a play on Chiang Kai-shek's (
The farces have not finished yet, and Hau has already lit the fuse of another battle over further suppression of the freedom of expression in the New Year's fireworks debate. Recently, there have been reports that the Taipei 101 fireworks show, for which the Tourism Bureau has won the bid, will be displaying the message "UN For Taiwan." Hau has responded with violent opposition.
According to the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) proposal for rejoining the UN, membership under any dignified title -- including "Taiwan" -- will be supported. If this proposal is true, then what is wrong with "UN for Taiwan"? This shows the KMT's duplicitous nature.
What is meant by Hau's statement that Taipei 101 is a business and would not cause trouble for the Taipei City Government? Why does displaying "UN for Taiwan" constitute creating trouble for the Taipei City Government? Hau needs to explain to Taipei residents whether the Taipei City Government supports UN membership for Taiwan.
Allen Houng is a professor in the Institute of Neuroscience at National Yang Ming University.
Translated by Angela Hong
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