“When written in Chinese, the word ‘crisis’ [危機] is composed of two characters — one represents danger and the other represents opportunity,” former US president John F. Kennedy said.
The quote surely comes as an apt description of the situation currently facing embattled Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強), who’s been engulfed in a controversy over seemingly dubious ties between the police and the underworld and questionable police integrity following a shooting on May 28, in which four Taichung police officers were found at the scene yet failed to intervene.
While a recent poll conducted by the United Daily News suggested the incident has impacted Hu’s approval rating, which took a dip of 9 percentage points, the truth of the matter is that he could easily have tried to translate a tough stance on crime into votes for his November re-election bid.
How? By exercising determination and getting to the bottom of the incident with transparency and impartiality regardless of who may be involved. Sadly, Hu has failed miserably despite repeated pledges to crack down on crime in the city.
As the result of slow action from Hu’s government, the incident has turned it into a national guessing game with many members of the public questioning the police investigation and mounting speculation over whether ranking officials were involved in some sort of conspiracy behind the shooting.
Hu’s incompetence is evident by the fact that it took the Taichung City Police Department a full 10 days after the killing to release a surveillance tape of the incident on Monday night. The delay in making the tapes public raises questions about the police investigation, but the fact that they were incomplete also fuels suspicion that the police have something to hide.
The surveillance footage revealed the four police officers were indeed playing mahjong at the time, contrary to the police department’s statement that they were not present. If the officers lied about that, one cannot but wonder what else they might be concealing.
Also, why has no sketch of the suspect been released even though his image was caught on tape? Again, the police’s mysterious delay on the issue has led the public to question whether there are “inconvenient truths” behind the case.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this incident is the possibility that the supposed forces of justice are playing for the other side.
In light of the way Hu and his government have handled the case, some Taichung residents may be wondering whether Hu deserves their support in November. Be that as it may, Hu’s term is not over yet, which means he is responsibile for the maintenance of public order in the city, weeding out unfit police officers and saving residents from a crime-rampant nightmare.
One way to put mounting suspicions surrounding the case to rest is for the police department to take timely and transparent action to get to the bottom of the matter regardless of the consequences and punish the officers involved.
Hu must make sure the police department takes action before the incompetent city government makes a difficult situation worse by further fueling negative impressions of the city police’s work ethnic and integrity.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS