“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.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS