KMT, get your priorities right
Let me see if I understand this correctly. Under the KMT’s watch, Taiwan’s unemployment rate is skyrocketing, GDP is in a free fall, exports are at their lowest in decades and people are increasingly concerned about losing their jobs and feel insecure about their future — yet Kaohsiung City Councilor Wang Ling-chiao (王齡嬌) of the KMT can find nothing better to do than collect signatures for a petition asking that the son of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) not be allowed to live in Kaohsiung.
I am sure there are rapists and child molesters living in southern Taiwan, yet no one is seeking to force them to change their city of residence.
The KMT does a great job of shifting attention away from how horribly it runs the country and onto the former president and his family.
Hopefully Taiwanese are smart enough to see through these tricks but I don’t hold out much hope based on the KMT supporters that I know.
Maybe we should start a petition asking that Wang leave the country. Let me know where and when to sign up for that.
CHRISTOPHER CASAS
Taipei
Kuan needs to get to work
We are told that Examination Yuan President John Kuan (關中) “renewed a proposal to reform the civil service by weeding out poorly performing employees” (“Civil servant pay won’t be cut,” Feb. 21, page 3). This is typical gibberish from government officials.
This is not the beginning of a program to get rid of incompetent personnel, it is just a proposal. Even worse, the fact that it is being “renewed” means that it has existed for a while without being implemented.
The fact that it is being renewed does not signify that it will be passed, enacted or enforced. Actually, it suggests that once again, nothing will be done. We are also told that incompetent civil servants will not suffer any pay cuts “in the current economic climate.” May I humbly enquire: “Why not?”
Why are we protecting incompetents and their incompetent political masters, who hired them, retained them and can’t get rid of them? Does this make sense to the government?
Kuan assures us that providing “a stable livelihood for government employees allowed them to perform their duties without worry.”
If they are competent, why should they worry? If they are incompetent, shouldn’t they worry rather than continue to provide subpar services?
Outside of government, incompetents worry, and rightly so. Many competent people have lost their jobs in the real world.
Kuan does not explain his logic, because he can’t. Is he suggesting that there is such widespread incompetence that it would really “threaten social stability”? This is fearmongering at its worst, or an admission of colossal failure on the part of the government.
Kuan wants a year to draw up an amendment to submit to the legislature for consideration, where it could take another year or longer to be enacted, if it is ever enacted.
Kuan said that 99 percent of government employees received an A or B rating, .02 got a C and in all of Taiwan, only five got a D rating. This is very sad yet also humorous.
He had to admit that “their reputation among the public is obviously not as good” and “the evaluation system is not serving its true purpose.”
Obviously. So who created the system and whose responsibility is it? Why hasn’t it been changed? Was it Kuan’s responsibility? Did he also receive an A rating?
Having lived in a number of countries, I am continually surprised by the extreme incompetence of Taiwanese authorities: Judges who refused a US couple the right to adopt a girl with mental disabilities because the couple was “too educated”; immigration officials who don’t know that a passport signifies citizenship; police who ignore scooters and cars polluting the air; ridiculous regulations for foreign professionals working in Taiwan, etc. There is endless incompetence to be found. Perhaps Kuan could start by looking in the mirror instead of making excuses and protecting incompetents.
CHAIM MELAMED
Pingtung
More English needed
Considering how much Taiwanese spend on English education, it is somewhat surprising not to really see that much of it, especially outside Taipei.
Many adults invest a lot of time, energy and money for their children and themselves to learn English. Unfortunately, the only practice that students get is in the classroom.
Government agencies such as museums, hospitals and police stations have made great efforts to improve their English services over the last few years with much success. However, a concerted effort by the business community to provide translations and services in English is missing.
This lack of English translation has negative effects on the non-Mandarin speakers living in Taiwan, making it hard for them to fully participate in society. Foreigners living in Taiwan have three choices: use gestures to communicate, always travel with a Mandarin speaker or learn Mandarin. While many foreigners have tried to adapt to society by learning Mandarin, this is a process that takes many years to master and not everyone has the time or finances to do it.
What is needed is a government mandate to encourage private businesses in the service sector to provide English translations for all information. This would benefit those non-native individuals living and working in Taiwan, as well as provide real-world examples for students of English. This would also benefit the tourism industry of the island.
ANDREW HOLOWNYCH
Hsinchu
Prisoners have rights too
The Geneva Conventions grant prisoners of war protection from “public curiosity.” But in the civilian case involving former president Chen Shui-bian, the media have inflamed public curiosity, often showing Chen through barbed wire doing his daily workout.
The guilt of the former president has not yet been proven in court and statements from President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) affirm that Chen is not being punished.
Public interest, which differs from public curiosity, is insufficient cause to infringe the minimum rights that ensure a fair trial. It is horrific to see footage of Chen in prison dress being broadcast repeatedly.
Though I feel he may likely be found guilty of at least some charge of corruption, guilt in this case should not be influenced merely in the interest of public curiosity.
As people deserve to be treated humanely, Taiwan has an obligation to establish better rules for custody that protect even guilty prisoners from public curiosity.
TOM ANDERSON
Jhongli, Taoyuan County
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with