National Security Council Secretary-General Su Chi (蘇起) has a problem.
First, his wife Chen Yue-ching (陳月卿) went on a book promotion tour to China. Now, his brother Su Yung-chin (蘇永欽) is set to take up a visiting professorship at Zhejiang University in Hangzhou.
Su’s wife and brother are not civil servants, so is harm inflicted if they travel to China on professional business? Are these matters of national security?
The Presidential Office says not.
The problem is that Su Chi is the man entrusted with maintaining national security — and defining its parameters. When members of his immediate and extended family travel to China for business or to teach while others are restricted from doing so, ordinary people have every right to be cynical if the government sits by and does nothing.
Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) Chairman Chiang Pin-kung’s (江丙坤) son was criticized for doing business in China — not least for probable conflict of interest. The fallout of this led President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) to say that public sentiment must be taken into account — and Chiang almost left the SEF.
People close to former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) chairman Lien Chan (連戰) are suspected of conflict of interest. There are also concerns that KMT members participating in KMT-Chinese Communist Party negotiations are using the forum to advance their personal and financial interests.
After Chen’s book promotion in China embarrassed her husband and made trouble for the government, Ma said this kind of incident would “never happen again.” Yet the Presidential Office knew of Su Yung-chin’s offer from Zhejiang University before it became public and said nothing.
It seems neither a conflict of interest nor the perception of one is of concern to the Ma government — even on matters of national security — unless there is a sufficiently large backlash in the media.
Yet the feeling that basic principles of national security can be casually flouted may pose a challenge to Ma’s leadership as time goes on.
After KMT hack Hsu Shu-po (�?�) was allegedly promised the position of chairman of Taipei 101 in exchange for not running for Yunlin County commissioner, the Presidential Office sensed that the backlash would be too great — regardless of the truth of the matter — and might lead to legal action over inducement involving electoral processes. Within hours the Presidential Office told the Cabinet to withdraw the appointment.
But when Ma hinted at the possibility of KMT Chairman Wu Poh-hsiung’s (吳伯雄) son taking the Taoyuan County commissioner’s post — just as Wu vacated his own post for the president — no one in the party suggested that inducement was involved.
Ma came to power partly on the understanding that he opposed the erosion of good governance, yet here we are, one year on, and a culture of privilege and hubris is being revitalized. In such a climate, even a responsible leader will struggle to look clean.
Su Yung-chin has an exceptional academic record — and is a former chairman of the National Communications Commission. He thus has many ways to make a living, which raises the question as to why he, like Su Chi’s wife, would go to China when he knew it would create problems for the president.
The answer is he and Su Chi’s wife knew it was highly likely they could do so without intervention — and that they might even be congratulated for their efforts.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations