Parallels across the globe
The response of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government to the melamine scare is in some ways analogous to the US government’s reaction to the problems in its banking sector. In both situations, domestic and foreign companies exploited a lack of regulation in an environment of institutional corruption to base the largest part of their profit margin upon practices that were unsound and, in terms of market stability, unsustainable.
When Sanlu Group executives decided to add melamine to milk to artificially raise protein readings and cheat the market, they turned the company into a sociopathic entity acting purely to sustain itself — and one that operated outside of the social contract and acceptable business ethics.
That the Ministry of Health raised the level of acceptable melamine in products from zero parts per million (ppm) to 2.5ppm as a response to the exposure of this scandal is, and I reserve the right to be wrong, a knee-jerk reaction because the minister feared that actually enforcing the zero ppm standard would not only mean an effective boycott on a whole range of goods from China but also seriously threaten domestic producers who may not have been meeting the standards for years.
In the US, taxpayers have now been asked to pay out US$700 billion to rescue a financial sector that has imploded under the weight of buying on the never-never and gambling with people’s mortgages and pensions. Before the “crash,” financiers were the first to insist on deregulation and “freedom of markets.”
This hegemony of neo-liberal economics has been exposed as a sham, because the same people now say that the crash represents the failure of markets, not the people that comprise them. It seems some markets are more equal than others and if they were to fall, governments fear that the whole house of cards would tumble too.
What is most striking, however, is that both the US and Taiwanese governments have in their own way put the interests of businesses before public security and safety.
In these democracies the influence and weight that the wealthy exert on the political decision-making process is disproportionate to that of the least wealthy.
Some citizens are more equal than others.
When corporate interests capture the agenda of a state and then act in a way that undermines the social contract between citizen, government and market, the integrity of the democratic polis is compromised.
Luckily some companies, like the Taiwan High Speed Rail Corp, have high standards and act as a beacon for others by showing that the extra expense is worth it to a business, since it almost guarantees customer satisfaction and trust.
If the KMT and Chinese Communist Party want business as usual, they may find the market to be uncooperative as — at least in Taiwan — freedom of information is likely to result in consumers making better choices. Perhaps then Taiwanese will defend their sovereignty and their health through their purses and wallets in the face of a national government that is a closed shop to their concerns but open for business.
BEN GOREN
Tamsui, Taipei County
Stop abuses of labor rights
Regarding the story on Indonesians in Taiwan celebrating Id al-Fitr (“Indonesians celebrate Id al-Fitr,” Oct. 6, page 2), I think it’s wonderful that some employers allow their foreign staff to take holidays.
On the other hand, I think a lot more needs to be done to prevent abuses of labor rights. I have a dear friend from Indonesia who came to Taiwan on a three-year contract. Her employer, a grocer, works her like a slave, sometimes making her work 14 to 16 hours a day.
Why not force employers to attend workshops on how to treat their foreign staff properly? They would be forced to pass a test and swear a binding oath not to force workers to work more than an eight or nine-hour day.
Why force a powerless foreigner to do the work of three people? Isn’t that how the Great Wall of China was built? But that was so long ago.
ANDREW FORS
Ottawa, Canada
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath