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
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
Every analyst watching Iran’s succession crisis is asking who would replace supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Yet, the real question is whether China has learned enough from the Persian Gulf to survive a war over Taiwan. Beijing purchases roughly 90 percent of Iran’s exported crude — some 1.61 million barrels per day last year — and holds a US$400 billion, 25-year cooperation agreement binding it to Tehran’s stability. However, this is not simply the story of a patron protecting an investment. China has spent years engineering a sanctions-evasion architecture that was never really about Iran — it was about Taiwan. The
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
RSS