Just as President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration is about to celebrate the signing of an historic trade agreement with China, Department of Health Minister Yaung Chih-liang (楊志良) once again managed to draw attention to himself.
Yaung’s latest faux pas — made while he was in the US — involved publicly expressing his intense dislike of Koreans, who he said had copied Taiwan’s health system but would never admit doing so.
Not only were such comments inappropriate for a public official, they also reflected a view propagated by an increasingly nationalist China. In other words, not only was our health minister making a fool of himself while abroad, he was also spewing Chinese propaganda.
This incident is unlikely to be well received by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which is facing a crisis in popularity ahead of important municipal elections in November. At a time when it is striving to rebuild its credibility and mend fences with countries supposedly alienated by the previous Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) administration, Yaung’s remarks can only make that task more onerous.
For the DPP, Yaung’s lack of discretion is a godsend, providing additional ammunition as it prepares to hold a mass rally in Taipei to oppose the controversial economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA).
The Ma administration has a week to distance itself from Yaung’s insulting rhetoric. Should it remain silent on the matter, we could only conclude that it condones such ugly Chinese nationalism and Yaung could well be added to the list of things to be targeted during the protests on Saturday.
Supporters of Taiwan not only have the responsibility to ensure the nation’s survival, but to protect its image abroad by displaying maturity, openness and respect for differences. The importance of distancing ourselves from the racism espoused by Yaung cannot be overstated, not only because it represents an effort to combat “Han” chauvinism, but also because it highlights the type of maturity that the world expects from a democracy.
Regardless of who is in power, Taiwan is in no position to insult other nations through its officials — especially through a crass form of nationalism for which Chinese officials have often been ridiculed. If we fail to condemn this type of behavior, we are no better than the Chinese officials we laugh at for their lack of tact.
Ultimately, a politician’s ability to conduct himself or herself properly serves as an indicator of their ability to oversee national policies. As Yaung is closely involved in managing the debilitated National Health Insurance (NHI) program — one that should be the envy of many countries but that is becoming increasingly unsustainable — his inability to behave like a professional politician raises questions about his qualifications. Are those of us who contribute to the NHI plan and rely on it in times of need really willing to trust someone who engages in such open bigotry to steer the nation’s health program in the right direction?
During the protest on Saturday, let’s hope that among all the placards criticizing the Ma administration and opposing an ECFA that is being forced on us, there will also be a few that give voice to the respect and openness of mind and spirit that far better represent the feelings of Taiwanese people than the racist comments of our health minister.
We love Taiwan and we love South Korea.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS