The government's announcement on Tuesday evening that gasoline and other fuel prices would be hiked prematurely the next day has not enhanced its political credibility, even if the economics are fairly innocuous.
Gasoline prices were supposed to go up on June 1, but the government’s change of mind on Tuesday to bring the date forward to early yesterday morning sent lines of scooter riders, car owners and truck drivers to gas stations around the country for a long and frustrating wait.
Premier Liu Chao-shiuan (劉兆玄) gamely rationalized this bizarre decision on Tuesday by citing public safety.
Many individuals, he said, had been hoarding gasoline as a consequence of the media’s reporting on the issue.
The premier seems to be employing poor advisers. Hoarding gasoline is hazardous and undertaken by people who privilege saving a small sum of money over the safe handling of inflammables — which is to say, not very many people.
It was therefore a politically rash act to cite the welfare of such people in justifying the decision, considering that the public is now entitled to ask which government commitments are reversible and which are not on such fundamental issues.
It also seems that Liu was passing the buck when he blamed media outlets for fanning this minority’s desire to stockpile gasoline and other fuels.
How were ordinary people going to be informed about the pending increases other than through the media?
And was he not expecting that there would be a similar phenomenon ahead of the June 1 price rise, though more manageably spread over several days?
In his government’s defense, Liu detailed the former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration’s price freeze policy and said that some in the pan-blue camp had argued that the government under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was simply “cleaning up the mess left by the DPP.”
Yet it was Ma, shortly after being elected president, who demanded that the Cabinet act simply in a “caretaker” capacity and not change government policy. It seems this included policies that the pan-blue camp considered not to be in the national interest.
Liu offered an apology to the public a few hours after his initial announcement. Government Information Office Minister Vanessa Shih (史亞平) yesterday also offered an apology on behalf of the government over the matter.
With Minister of National Defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) apologizing on Monday for comments he made last week concerning the March 19, 2004, assassination attempt on the former president and vice president, the Ma administration has now notched up an impressive three apologies from three senior members of Cabinet within days of coming to power.
Ma’s presidential campaign enjoyed one of its more effective moments when it trumpeted the slogan: “We are ready.”
Judging from the government’s performance and slipshod execution of policies relating to rising prices, the question asks itself: Were they really ready?
But a second question is rather more important, and quite difficult to answer given the events of the last few days: When will they be ready?
A Chinese diplomat’s violent threat against Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her remarks on defending Taiwan marks a dangerous escalation in East Asian tensions, revealing Beijing’s growing intolerance for dissent and the fragility of regional diplomacy. Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday posted a chilling message on X: “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off,” in reference to Takaichi’s remark to Japanese lawmakers that an attack on Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival. The post, which was later deleted, was not an isolated outburst. Xue has also amplified other incendiary messages, including one suggesting
Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces. The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat,
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
RSS