Are Taiwanese fooled?
When my friends and I last visited our home country I was stunned to see that Taiwan is no longer the same free country since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was elected by the majority of the Taiwanese people. The local newspapers and TV stations appear to be out of touch and not reporting what has been happening in Taiwan. The economic crisis, the high suicide rate and a feeling of helplessness have deeply eroded the fledging democracy that the previous two presidents had built.
President Ma has not honored his campaign promises to improve the economy or to bring political reform and protect the sovereignty of Taiwan. Worse yet, he has made a mockery of the law by manipulating the judicial system. One example is the continuous persecution of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his family. Ma has fooled the nation and the public many times. I wonder if the majority of the Taiwanese people agree with his actions.
Is he condoned as a ruler, or a dictator? I know he doesn’t act alone. He has loyal followers who work for him and execute his wishes.
During a recent court appearance, six prosecutors congratulated a not so credible witness after she apparently said something they were pleased with! It is obvious that prosecutors are not conforming to standards. The majority of the news media did not make this an issue. I have not seen or read about any law professors condemning the prosecutors. It is quite clear that the law schools in Taiwan are not giving the prosecutors a good education.
The blame for the current situation needs to be shared by the Taiwanese majority who voted for Ma and his Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and by those who were too apathetic to vote.
The problems of Ma and the KMT have been fueled by government officials who think they need to keep their position by implementing bad policies, which make people suffer.
Also to blame are Taiwanese who are short-sighted and rush for personal short-term financial gain by transferring hard-earned economic prowess to China at the cost of long-term political stability and independence. Even those who previously were pro-Taiwan are caving in to China’s demands now that their economic and financial survival depends on low-wage factories.
Am I mad? Yes, I am furious. Do Ministry of Justice officials, law school professors and the many respected intellectuals have consciences? Why are they not speaking up and telling people the truth? If Ma is fooling the people, it should be pointed out they are also allowing themselves to be fooled.
TIEN C. CHENG
Libertyville, Illinois
History backs ECFA plan
The debate over the economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) reminds me of the debate surrounding the free trade agreement between Canada and the US: After the FTA was signed on Oct. 4, 1988, there was an election in Canada in which Conservatives were in favor of the FTA and the Liberals were opposed.
The Conservatives won and the FTA was ratified. Four years later, the FTA was expanded to include Mexico and became the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Then, on Oct. 25, 1993, there was another election in which the Liberals won saying they were opposed to NAFTA, but it nevertheless went into effect on Jan. 1, 1994.
My point is that you shouldn’t always believe what opposition politicians say when they claim that the government has negotiated a bad deal that will cost jobs, because they are just saying these things just for the sake of opposing the government.
It would actually be very scary if the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) really did believe their protectionist propaganda, as most economists these days know that protectionism isn’t the way to go.
Protectionism is generally considered the main reason why there was an economic depression in the 1930s.
Indeed, it is not the KMT that is lying here: The claim from the KMT is that China is actively negotiating free trade deals with other Asian countries while Taiwan is unable to sign any trade deals because Asian countries don’t want to risk their trade status with China.
This is all true: By signing the ECFA with China, Taiwan would be free to negotiate trade deals with other Asian countries without the risk of offending Beijing. The alternative would be for Taiwan to end up as an isolated country like Cuba or North Korea. Is that really what people in the DPP want?
Protectionism is based on an out-of-date, disproved economic theory. The basic assumption is that each side in a negotiation has its own interests and that one side in a negotiation must win at the expense of the other.
This flies in the face of 59 years of modern economic theory and ignores the fact that the two sides may have mutual interests that could form the basis of an agreement.
The reality of the situation is that free trade deals are designed to be win-win situations.
The members of the DPP should be ashamed of themselves for lying to the people of Taiwan for the sake of political gain.
Then again, they are only doing what politicians all over the world do. I can understand this mentality, but I do not condone it.
MARTIN PHIPPS
Taichung
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
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
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