Taiwan’s ‘Watergate’?
On Jan. 8, former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislator Diane Lee (李慶安) vowed to present documentation in regard to the allegation that she possesses dual nationality. She claims to have documentation that exonerates her of these charges. She vowed to present this documentation to the legislature before the end of January.
Also on Jan. 8, KMT Chairman Wu Po-hsiung (吳伯雄) was quoted as saying: “If someone cannot produce the evidence before the deadline, the KMT will ask the legislature to tackle the matter in a speedy manner.”
The deadline has now passed. So far, Lee has made no further public announcements regarding her case. There has been no public announcement that she has produced — or would be able to produce — documentation that explains the case in her favor.
Let us hope that Wu was sincere in his statement. Let us hope there will be a speedy inquiry into the matter. After all, as the saying goes: “Justice delayed is justice denied.”
Let us hope as well that this case does not turn into “Passportgate” — Taiwan’s equivalent of the Watergate scandal in the 1970s.
A cursory analysis of the Watergate scandal shows that former US president Richard Nixon’s “fall” — his resignation from office — was compelled by his attempts at covering up break-ins and illegal wiretaps.
There is much to be learned from this precedent. If there is an attempted cover-up in Lee’s case, it will only compound the problem and worsen the situation in Taiwan. This is a serious matter that no one will be able to “sweep under the rug.”
MICHAEL SCANLON
East Hartford, Connecticut
Democratic health check
Democracy reflects the best human values in society. People all over the world should care about the democratic status of each other’s countries, just as neighbors should take care of each other. The third open letter (“Eroding Justice,” Jan. 21, page 8) is welcome by all Taiwanese who embrace those values.
The interference by and the unprofessional conduct of Justice Minister Wang Ching-feng (王清峰) and the prosecutors who performed a skit mocking former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and expressed their prejudice against him, added to the daily attacks by KMT-controlled media and the questionable replacement of judges, mean that any result emerging from Chen’s trial will be hard to accept. This is just like school exams; when the system of examination is deficient or unfair, the results will be questionable.
Only continued concern — in Taiwan and abroad — can lead to change and ensure that Taiwan becomes a symbol of freedom and democracy.
NI KUO-JUNG
Hsinchu
Wrong on the economy
The Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) administration’s efforts to “rescue” Taiwan’s economy will not only fail, but they exemplify a collectivist morality and ought to be vigorously opposed.
The government’s attempt to engineer domestic consumer demand in response to dropping consumer demand abroad is misguided. As the supply side of the economy currently outweighs the demand side, it is the supply side that should be allowed to fall, not demand artificially created by means of public debt.
What your publication should seek to explain is not merely one of economic pragmatism, but a moral one. Each and every Taiwanese is a sovereign individual — not a mere economic number — and as such they should be free to make their own choices as to whether and how to spend or invest their money.
Consequently, the overwhelming desire of Taiwanese to save their money and curb their spending, and the choice of many Taiwanese businesses to cut costs and reduce the scale of their commitments, are decisions that ought to be respected — not interfered with.
The government has no moral right to order or merely encourage people on what they should do with their own money.
For years the editorial stance of the Taipei Times has generally been reflective of the broad political views of its readership. In that I mean the “social democratic” collectivist outlook expounded by the Democratic Progressive Party.
In the face of a possible run on the US dollar this year, this stance is likely a source of danger to Taiwan in the short to medium term. Consequently, I strongly urge a reconsideration of your philosophical premises and a complete about-turn in editorial stance.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a