After Taiwan's legislative elections on Saturday it is clear that Taiwan needs an in-depth study on how to determine electoral districts.
If the regulation of one winner per electoral district is to continue, then the Central Election Commission (CEC) needs to redraw electoral boundaries based on a nationwide census.
The division of the outlying islands into three electoral districts, for example, means that votes in less populated areas carry more weight than the votes in the rest of the country.
If some votes carry more weight in certain parts of the country, the elections are neither fair nor democratic.
Perhaps some less populated areas should be combined into one electoral district, or alternatively, more densely populated areas in, say, Taipei County need to be split up further.
A study of this kind should be the responsibility of the CEC.
It should be non-partisan and employ a combination of both domestic and foreign-based consulting firms that specialize in election procedure and statistics.
The Legislative Yuan should not be involved in the process.
If a nationwide census cannot be carried out because of a lack of government resources and consequently a fair division of the electoral districts cannot be achieved, then the old system of multiple winners in an electoral district should be re-considered.
Formosan Association for Public Affairs Europe, Greece
Time for Academia Formosa
A recent article in the Taipei Times regarding the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) reminded me of the need for Taiwan's government to change the name to "China Affairs Council."
The "mainland" of "Mainland Affairs Council" must refer to China, since the main function of MAC is essentially to provide an official channel for peaceful resolution of any problems between Taiwan and China. But the use of "mainland" in MAC is problematic, troublesome and inappropriate in terms of Taiwan's sovereignty. This impropriety alone is enough reason for the government to replace the word "mainland" with "China."
The problematic name reminds me of the renaming of the "Chiang Kai-Shek International Airport" to "Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport" early last year. This was a welcome development.
Most recently, the Ministry of Education successfully replaced a plaque alluding to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) with one reading "Liberty Square" at the former Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall (中正紀念堂), now the Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall (台灣民主紀念館). This has made all patriotic Taiwanese jubilant, particularly Taiwanese Americans. This symbolizes another "giant step" toward normalization of all inappropriate names for places and institutions in Taiwan.
In fact, it is an action of justice for Taiwan, a country where freedom and democracy were lacking under Chiang's regime. For years, many were ashamed to set foot on that piece of land.
The reason is very simple: Why should we pay tribute to the monster behind the 228 Massacre, which saw an estimated 20,000 Taiwanese elites killed? Chiang was also the implementer of the longest period of martial law in history while he ran the country as a dictator and refused to keep a seat at the UN. This is the key reason that Taiwan is today embroiled in an uphill battle to rejoin the UN.
The rectifications of the names described above have also provided a rationale for us to believe that it is time for the government to correct the name "Academia Sinica" (
The media have reported for years that many members of Academia Sinica with Chinese ethnicity appear to work for China and not for Taiwan's welfare. Because of political discrimination, many distinguished, patriotic Taiwanese candidates were denied membership.
I strongly suggest when the president of the institute prepares to send a confirmation letter to each of the members, he or she should make it absolutely clear that each member must possess virtue, quality, charisma and the will to promote Taiwan's statehood, as well as demonstrate their efforts toward the progression of Taiwan's democracy, elevation of Taiwan's quality of living and advocacy of Taiwan's science education.
Only those who have these characteristics are qualified to be members of Academia Formosa, and thus are able to truly devote themselves to making great contributions to Taiwan. Any members of the so-called "Academia Sinica" who encourage re-unification with communist China should be deprived of membership as they are definitely not qualified to be members of Academia Formosa.
Bang H. Hwang
In September 2013, the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) quietly released an internal document entitled, “Coursebook on the Military Geography of the Taiwan Strait.” This sensitive, “military-use-only” coursebook explains why it is strategically vital that China “reunify” (annex) Taiwan. It then methodically analyzes various locations of interest to People’s Liberation Army (PLA) war planners. The coursebook highlights one future battlefield in particular: Fulong Beach, in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District, which it describes as “3,000 meters long, flat, and straight,” and located at “the head of Taiwan.” A black and white picture of Fulong’s sandy coastline occupies the
US President Joe Biden’s first news conference last month offered reassuring and concerning insights regarding his administration’s approach to China. Biden did not mention the contentious meeting in Alaska where US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan confronted China’s top two foreign policy officials. The Americans implicitly affirmed the administration of former US president Donald Trump’s direct pushback against communist China’s repressive domestic governance and aggressive international behavior. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) and Chinese Central Foreign Affairs Commission Director Yang Jiechi (楊潔篪) had explicitly demanded a return to the policies of
The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) between the US, India, Australia and Japan has found a new lease of life after China’s militarization of the South China Sea, acquisition and fortification of a new — and China’s first — naval facility in Djibouti, and growing naval activities in the Indian Ocean. With the Chinese navy consolidating its presence in the Indian Ocean and building a base in Djibouti, as well as foraying into the Mediterranean and Baltic seas, major European powers have been unsettled. France and Britain are already busy stepping up their naval presence in the Indo-Pacific region. In February,
Interrupting the assimilation of Xinjiang’s Uighur population would result in an unmanageable national security threat to China. Numerous governments and civil society organizations around the world have accused China of massive human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and labeled Beijing’s inhumane and aggressive social re-engineering efforts in the region as “cultural genocide.” Extensive evidence shows that China’s forceful ethnic assimilation policies in Xinjiang are aimed at replacing Uighur ethnic and religious identity with a so-called scientific communist dogma and Han Chinese culture. The total assimilation of Uighurs into the larger “Chinese family” is also Beijing’s official, central purpose of its ethnic policies